


-ly (SI u 






.a' c ° « '^o 

„ f>rsrv <r ^ 



</> ,.^'' 


- . c ,'^ 

^ \> <■ 

^ 'Jrd //yy^ 'f' 

V 4'^ 


^ oso ^ -O 



' J ) 


'>'■ :^- v > s '-”' / 

" • y- sv ^ <. 

//A /. ^''\^ .; 

• .. - i . ^ ■ 


C/A 




' U . 

*,so" ^0'' '-o, "yyy'y 

r Myi/h o A /. . A ' 


'• '' A '" 

0 i A y^jrTTrt-. 


0 « V .'A 



<< 


> 



0 



v ‘ 




^ o 
>/> 






^.'’ 0 

, , '■'it'. » .0 s 0 ’ ^0- -o *■ 



,. o - .<•''*« 


O « )S 


-\ 


V 


aV 


V 

O o ' 





.0 


. A <, 

/\, ItIP/ -\ 

V ',^i^ ^ -i.' ' A??^St - '“' ■^ 

« O 0 ^ • ' y V ’= 5 . ' 

pA^:' xOo ^ :#;5 

’ A '^A ' 1 ^^ ' ' a ‘^'^ V !- ■'' c - " ' ' vA - ' ■’ ‘ a /"^- 





* V 

^ o' 


7 - 




" S ' </> 




•/>. 



. v \^’ : 


a \'^ on 0 ''' , , A 

^SS vL " ^ ^ O O ' V ^ 


cr ^ Vv ' v '; 


: ^ 

5,0 • >■ 



A ‘V 


'■y. 


y y. " 




\ 


0 


y^' /A o V ' ,0 

^/■A / ^ 


. 0 ^ 0 ^ sO ^' ^ 

■■^.y -rnyy • 


: y y 


y y. 




^ ' ‘k' 


>P'=U. 


aO 


13- 


z 'V ^ 

^ " tT" » - ^ 

s ' ■ < 0 '*' , , " < "^0 • ' ,■> 

" 


< 


A 

'# ^ <, “Wg 

, 00 ^ 


V 


A 


<\ 


K° 


" » ' ' ” \^^ >, S " ' A ’ '* “ 0'^' 

’V. c,^ 


A-- 

' % ^ 


03 


W Co 


A 


iV </> 





1 



\ . ■ , - 


\ 


•I 



I 



V 

h 

I 


* 


I 

t 


( 


\ 

# 


\ 


/ 

/ 


V 


< 



» 


( 


4 





/ 


» 


*< 




« 


t 

\ 


4 


✓ 




V 


1 




/ 





* -•* 


% 


h \ 


\ 


4 

k 

4' 


f 

A 


4 



^ . • 


I 


fi " 


# 


I 























SATCHEL SERIES, No. 27. 




# 








PRICE 20 CENTS. 





A .•I'L,' 



;T.1' ■ , 

|t! ; '■ , ; , . 


f • ".V 


..im 

1 1 *, < 7 ' 

f<=.' ' -‘./'ra A: 


^ ■ ■ 


*< -V •'•'• '■'. • 


■^V.ri- ■’;:> 

? 0 i^'-:' 


•’•r ri'*' ■■• 1. J is. 

■ ■ A^^ . 


-.*>;• 


V - 






:r,,' ' ; /. : 

.rticX..'’-.:.. . T ♦ _- • . . .. 


i . 0 *• • • 

i,)t^'-r;.v-'.'.,N. 


• -A '.fl . * •• • 


•/.■••i(. • .- 


> 


t > • 


f\< f ;s 

te: 




i'-M- 


> \: 


e /«■ \ 1 




' * <h ' 

4»t» V « 


I'^.V 


'.-. *y a 


. S'- ' 


' ' .*’ .1 » -w. I 





Hi- . ^ 


rnmW '^■' ^ 




,, p, f 


' ‘-4’ 


." I i 


*. • •» 






it': V; ; . ^ 

-r- .. . , 


' '. ' e'.V* 

*. / , . ^ 

• J 


. >, 

/• 


'' ' ' c ' • 


> 


<. 


•s 

f $ 

/ \ 


'* J . 
■ J 


'i 


•V/ 

■sr 




S 


I • 








,S!' • ' ■ 

'S-4?" ■: 

■ TiT'.', ^ . ' • 

*i\%y . ' i 

■ 

. ' ■ . 'v. A . 


I’-S /f ■■ 

^‘r U.',,Vs.*.w v*"' ' > 

■■ ■ - ' 

vw/"' 


/ V:v 




’ {■■ ' . 

‘ ► '4‘ ' ■ . 


V V <l! 


^ V *o 


J. I «f.‘* r 






i‘. ; 




k /.-< --r-N* 

L ; ^ 


'■Ju 


. f 

..r. 


'./4 ■« 


V » ' 


' .yv 

. .♦ 

/V •' 



'<f' "' ■' 

'V' '$ 


VA'-. _ .■'- . L. 


'yo' « 


/i ni. 








. /.* IvVi 




9 :x 


•.'ij' 











rvvjCi 



WHAT’S THE Matter? 


/ 


JOSEPHINE JACKSON. 



NEW YORK : 


THE AUTHOES’ PUBLISHING COMPANY, 
27 Bond Street. 







COPYEIGHT, 1880, 

Bt The Authors’ Publishing Company, New York. 









PEEFAOE. 


If there is any good reason why I should call my- 
self the author/’ simply because I have written the fol- 
lowing pages, I am ignorant of it. So I shall say “ I.” 

What I believe to be facts I have, in the following 
pages, treated as such without the circumlocution of 
“the author has reached the conclusion after careful 
thought and study, that, eto.^ etcP If this style seems 
dogmatic, it has at least the merit of brevity. 

Having read that “Italics are odious,” I feel some 
hesitancy about using them. Nevertheless, I confess to 
a liking for an author who has taken pains to elucidate 
matters by their use. It isn’t pleasant to study half an 
hour over a sentence to decide what the author had 
uppermost in his mind at the time of writing, when a 
few words in italics would make it all clear. 

The only criticism of the following pages to which 
I am not perfectly indiflFerent can only come from those 
who are farther advanced — more enlightened on the sub- 


vi * PREFACE, 

ject treated than I am. They may say, and justly, that 
the evils complained of are not portrayed with enough 
force. Can they be? Let those who thus criticise at- 
tempt the task, and they may then look with more tol- 
eration on my bungling effort. 

They may also affirm that I have wholly left out 
some very important specifications. To this I akso 
plead guilty, and again hope that my omissions may 
move some ‘‘abler pen” than mine to try and supply 
these deficiencies. 

j- J- 


WHAT’S THE MATTER? 


CHAPTER I. 

“ Who said anything was the matter ? ” 

I thought you did. 

“You’re mistaken, madam.” 

Probably you are a man, then; and it was your 
mother, or wife, or wife’s mother, or your daughter, 
sister, sister-in-law,- aunt, grandmother, cousin, or maid- 
servant who said she had the headache, backache, 
sideache, neuralgia, nervousness, depression of spirits, 
etc., etc., etc. Please pardon my mistake, but tell me, — 
Why are women less healthy than men, and (if 
“ common fame ” has it right) less powerful of in- 
tellect ? 

Eemembering that the Yankee answered, “ Why, du 
they ? ” when the Englishman asked, “ What makes a 
Yankee always answer one question by asking another?” 
I am not surprised to have my question met by the 
query, “Why, are they?” 


6 


WRAT8 THE MATTER? 


At present, I propose to leave the intellect out of 
the question, considering merely the health. 

If any of you are inclined to doubt that women 
are sick more than men, I refer you, first, to the 
family or families of which you have been a member 
as far back as your recollection extends ; second, to the 
families with whom you are acquainted at the present 
time, and, third, to all the doctors you know. But 
I think this is unnecessary ; for I have never seen a 
person who did not admit that invalids, especially 
chronic invalids, are much more numerous among 
woraen than among men — though a man warranted 
sound and kind in all harness,’’ is exceedingly rare. 

True, the statement has been made, that the aver- 
age duration of life is greater among women than 
among m6n ; but that is easily accounted for by the 
loss of life among sailors, soldiers, miners, and others 
whose occupation exposes them to dangers from which 
women are usually exempt. Besides these, there are 
reasons which we shall notice farther on. 

But it is health, not life, that we are now consid- 
ering, so let us return to the question, Why are 
women less healthy than men ? ” 

^"'Because they are women,” somebody answers. 


WHAT 8 THE MATTER? 


7 


Of all the reasons I ever heard assigned, that is 
the most absurdly preposterous. 

‘^Because they are womenP I would just as lief 
call the Creator of all things a fool as to make such a 
statement as that. Will you tell me to whom Nature 
has consigned the young for care ? Then will you tell 
me of any calling under the sun that requires more un- 
ceasing attention, steadier nerves, brighter spirits, greater 
endurance, patience, and wisdom than the care of chil- 
dren? You cannot charge the Euler of the universe 
with greater folly than to claim that it is ‘‘natural ‘for 
women to be sick.’’ There is not a day, not to speak 
of weeks, months, and years, from the very earliest ex- 
istence of a child, that it can afford to have its mother 
sick. 

“Because they are women.” If this be true, let the 
naturalist cease his cry of “ wonderful adaptation of means 
to ends.” Wonderful ^adaptation would be much more 
appropriate. 

But, thank God, that is not true. He has not made 
the owl to seek its prey by night and given it eyes 
that can only see in the daytime. He has not given 
the fishes fins and gills and placed them on dry land to 
die of thirst and inaction. He has not fitted the ani- 


8 


WHATS THE MATTER? 


mals .who sport among ice and snow for that life and 
put them on the equator ; and he has not called woman 
to a sphere more than all others requiring unceasing 
joyous, bounding health, and formed her so that sick- 
ness, especially protracted sickness, is a necessity. Does 
not your reason rebel against such a thought? 

Furthermore, if sex be the cause of this difference, 
should we not find it wherever the two sexes exist? 
But is this the case? Are the females among horses, 
cattle, sheep, swine, cats, dogs, and fowls, wild or tame, 
any less healthy than the males? They should be if 
sex makes the difference. Kernember we are not dis- 
cussing size or strength now — only health. 

So we come back to the question again : Why are 
women less healthy than men ? If rum and tobacco do 
all that is asserted of them, men should be the sicklj^ 
ones, for when it comes to dietetic habits, those of women 
certainly bear favorable comparison with those of men. 

It is often said that the difference may be satisfac- 
torily accounted for on the ground that w’omen are 
more self-sacrificing than the other half of the world — 
that they will bear their own sufferings in silence and 
minister to the wants of others regardless of the tax on 
their own vitality, while the reverse is true of men. 


WBATS THE MATTER? 


9 


Perhaps there is some ground for this opinion, but does 
anyone believe that accounts for all the difference ? And 
— to leave the question direct and moralize a little — is it 
not a very unwise sacrifice, sacrificing much more than 
herself, for a woman, especially a wife, mother, and home- 
maker, to so exhaust her vital forces in serving others 
as in turn to require at their hands a hundred-fold of 
the service rendered. Perhaps women have exalted self- 
sacrifice too much, and ought to bring it down on a level 
with good sense and judgment ; for certainly the health 
of women is of the highest importance. 

What else can be replied to the question ? — for it is 
not yet satisfactorily answered. 

One reason for it is, that women do not value health 
as -they should. The depraved notion that to be robust 
and healthy is not as lady-like, or womanly, if you please, 
as to be frail and sickly, has much to do with keeping 
women in the half-alive condition in which so many 
of them remain. Could our people know the truth, 
that to be sick is a sin and a shame^ they would not so 
unblushingly tell of their sicknesses, aches, and pains. 
If you are sick somebody is to blame. And just think 
of the trouble it makes. Think, fathers and mothers 
who are lying in bed being taken care of, think if you 


10 


WHAT’S THE MATTER 1 


can, of what has put you in this condition. Eveiy effect 
has its cause. 

Ah, mother ! in that long sickness of yours how your 
children suffered ! How that son and daughter found 
their way into company that you so sorely regret. Had 
you been well, as it is the duty of every mother to be, 
you could have watched and guarded them. How your 
little ones were hurt physically and morally by the in- 
judicious treatment of servants ! 

What a burden of care and sorrow your husband 
carried about! Do you remember that he sought in 
vain among all his relatives and yours to find a woman 
having a personal interest in the matter able to care 
for you and the little children, and was obliged to bring 
a stranger? Do you remember the perplexity and dis- 
couragement in his tone when he “ wondered what was 
the matter with all the women ? 

Oh yes, you remember it all ; but has it occurred to 
you that such troubles as this is unnecessary — not only 
unnecessary but wicked ? 

Have you tried to study out the causes and avoid 
them in the future? 

My heart aches when I consider all the misery that 
sickness causes. I think of cheerless, desolate, disor- 


WSATS THE MATTER? 


11 


derly houses that but for sickness might be happy 
homes, and my sympathy reaches out with longing to 
offer some remedy. But when I talk to women on this 
subject, what do I hear ? I hear that which convinces 
me that our people ought to be educated to a higher 
appreciation of health, to a greater realization of. what 
a curse sickness is, and to a knowledge of the fact that 
as a rule, it is unnecessary. 

A woman living in Middlebury, Conn., is the mother 
of thirteen children, and has never been confined to 
her bed a day in her life. I tell this to women. One 
looks incredulous, another scornful, another indifferent. 
I told it to a woman with a hollow chest, hollow eyes, 
hollow cheeks and a general alhgone look about her — 
she is under the doctor’s care most of the time. What 
did she say ? Surely such a forlorn specimen must 
have welcomed the knowledge that uninterrupted health 
is possible to a woman. Not a bit. She turned up 
her nose and said ‘^That’s too much like a cat.” 

I wanted to say you might as well be a cat as a 
miserable, peevish, nervous woman, but I refrained. 

I told of this Middlebury wonder to another woman 
who has the headache three weeks out of four, is 
humped on the shoulders and drawn in at the stomach 


12 


WHAT 8 THE MATTER? 


— all from dj^spepsia — and she said ^‘That’s too much 
like a horse.” 

I have told the same thing to others in no better 
condition than those I have mentioned, and instead of 
hearing a hearty wish that all women might be as 
healthy, we hear That’s too much like the animals.” 

Now, do tell me why “the animals” should have 
monopoly of God's greatest earthly blessing — health ? 
Is uninterrupted health a disgrace ? No ! We need to 
be converted in this respect. 

Another reason for more invalidism — and just here 
let me ask you to consider the origin of the word. In- 
valid comes from two Latin words meaning not valid, 
and is defined, “ Of no force, weight, or cogency ; 
weak.” Can anything better describe a nonentity than 
that? What is it but a good-for-nothing. Of course 
you may be invalided muscularly and yet have “ force, 
weight, or cogency,” mentally considered ; but to be a 
thorough, or through and througli invalid, is to be a 
thorough good-for-nothing ; and Pd rather be a fine 
horse or a good cat even than to be a good-for-nothing. 

What a grand thing a human being is with every 
muscle, every faculty, active and strong? 

Do you realize it? Then compare such a being 


WHAT 8 THE MATTER? 


13 


with the feeble, irresolute, inefficient, suffering, dying 
specimens we everywhere meet, and tell me what is the 
matter ? 

In reply to the query, why a greater amount of this 
invalidism or uselessness is found among women, we are 
told that their indoor life explains it. Then please tell 
us what explains their indoor life. The very same 
thing that explains their having more than their share 
of sickness. 

And now we have come to the great, all-sufficient 
reason for both. 


14 : 


WHATS THE MATTER? 


CHAPTEE II. 

Here I pause. It takes my breath away to think 
of making the fatal announcement. Hot because it’s 
something new and startling that nobody ever thought 
of before. Ho, no, not that. Enough has been said 
and written about it to convert millions if they would 
listen or read. You all know it yourselves, but some- 
how or other you persistently ignore it in your daily 
practice. 

I am afraid that the minute j^our eyes light on the 
word you will throw down tliis book with a gesture of 
impatience, even if the exclamation of contempt be 
wanting, which — isn’t very probable. 

How can I bring myself to the task of uttering that 
little word ? Behold me, on my knees, with my face 
aglow with passionate entreaty begging you by your 
love and respect for health, by your hatred and scorn 
of sickness, not to lay this book aside when I tell you 
that woman’s dress is the great reason for her inva- 
lidism. Go on with me through these pages, and if 


WRArS THE MATTER? 


15 


you can gainsay what I say, I will take it all back. If, 
on the contrary, I prove to you that woman in a suita- 
ble dress would be healthier, nobler, more useful and 
far happier, what do you propose to do about it ? Men 
are called reasonable beings; women, I grieve to say, 
have the reputation of being unreasonable. I wonder 
how well each of you who read this book will sustain 
the character assigned. If you are a woman, when you 
read the arguments I bring against your style of dress, 
if you are unreasonable, you will go on your way as 
before — perhaps. If you are a man, and therefore (?) 
reasonable, you will straightway do your best to have 
all your female relatives wear something that will not 
keep them from being and doing all the good they are 
capable of. 

But perhaps you want me to prove my statement 
that woman’s dress is the cause of her being a greater 
or more common invalid than man. Well, I admit that, 
being only a Hygienist and not an Anatomist or Physi- 
ologist, you have set me a hard task, and even were I 
versed in the sciences of which I confess myself igno- 
rant, you might not be, and so I should be just as badly 
off. 

But let me tell you how to prove it to your own 


16 


WRATS THE MATTER? 


satisfaction. Change clothes for one year. Let all the 
men begin at their heads and tie up their hair into 
twists and braids, frizzes, crimps, and bangs, and get a 
hat with a crown so small that long pins must be used 
to hold it in place, cut out the neck and cut off the 
sleeves of their shirts, get good strong glove-fitting 
corsets and draw them tight enough to cut off one half 
their breathing power and leave an ugly, ungraceful de- 
pression at the waist-line, put on a garment reaching 
from waist to feet that hinders a natural step and re- 
quires unceasing care to keep it dry and clean, and fin- 
ish up with shoes set up on little pegs in the middle 
of the foot. 

Let them adhere to this steadfastly for one year, except 
when they are sick in bed, and give the women their 
outfit— not even excepting their ‘^rum and tobacco’’ — 
and if you then call for proof that woman’s dress is 
ruinous to health. I’ll muster the long array of doctors’ 
testimony which I have on hand. Perhaps I’d better 
bring on a little now, though I know it’s perfectly use- 
less. You’ll read that the heart, lungs, stomach, and 
liver of four-fifths of our women are all “jammed to 
smash,” that their skirts are ruinously long and heavy, 
and if you are a woman you will look calmly up from 


WHATS TEE MATTER? 


17 


the page and tell your dressmaker to ^^take up the 
under-arm seams a little more and lengthen the skirt 
a trifle, as you heard they were going to wear them 
longer.” If a man, probably you’ll say, do hate to 
see a woman look like a slouch. I like a trim, tidy figure, 
and a skirt of graceful length.” Nevertheless, I’ll try 
to do my duty; and quote from the doctors. 

Dr. Ellis says, in his work on Avoidable Causes 
of Disease :” “ This dreadful practice ” (wearing tight 
clothes) has done more within the last century than 
war, pestilence, and famine, toward the physical deterio- 
ration of civilized man, I verily believe. 

“ More than this, I believe it is doing more injury 
to our race to-day, than intemperance in all its horrid 
forms. This habit grows upon the individual like the 
drunkard’s thirst for whisky, and it soon becomes a ne- 
cessity requiring to be steadily increased. The muscles 
of the body were intended to sustain it erect; but the 
very moment a lady applies a tight dress, it takes ofl:’ 
the action of the muscles ; in accordance with a well- 
known law of the muscular system, when they cease to 
be used they grow small and feeble. . . . The longer 
tight dressing has been continued, the more feeble and 
delicate these natural supports, and the person feels the 


18 


WRATS THE MATTER? 


necessity continually of increasing the tightness of the 
dress to sustain the body erect. 

“It is for this reason that no lady ever feels that she 
dresses too tight, any more than the rum-drinker feels 
that he drinks too much, unless she suddenly increases 
the force applied. She may even destroy life without 
actually feeling that her dress is too tight ; in fact, feel- 
ing all the time that she dresses just tightly enough to 
make her feel right ; that is, to give her proper support.” 

I appeal to you, ladies to bear testimony, as you have 
so many times before, to the truth of these statements. 
How many times I’ve heard women say, I couldn’t 
live without my corsets. I feel as if I should fall all to 
pieces without them.” You use this as an argument in 
their favor, but it only proves that the muscles which 
ought to hold you firmly together, are so weakened that 
they cannot do their work, and the longer you keep on 
these artificial suppoi^s the weaker will you become. I 
don’t know what would become of you if occasional fits 
of sickness did not compel you to take off your corsets 
and let nature have a chance to restore to these poor 
weakened muscles a little of their rightful freedom. 

Dr. Ellis then speaks of the Indians who compress 
their skulls with heavy weights, and without admiring 


WHAT 8 THE MATTER? 


19 


their taste says that no serious consequences result, and 
continues: “Not so with the habit we are now con- 
sidering ; for if we -judge as to the degree of evil . . . 
by the physical consequences which follow to our race, 
it is certainly one of the most fearful and deadly evils 
and sins in existence — compared to it intemjperance sinks 
into insignificanGeP 

That’s strong language. Anyone of a logical turn 
of mind can’t help thinking, that of the women who 
went on the crusade against drunkenness and liquor- 
selling, probably nine tenths were, in their dress, guilty 
of as great a sin as they were trying so nobly to do 
away with. I often ask myself how long this shame- 
ful ignorance and lack of conscience in this respect 
must last. The great mass seems to be in worse than 
heathen darkness on this subject, and to enlighten them 
seems an impossibility from the fact that, as Dr. Ellis 
says, “No woman feels that her dress is too tight.” 

It does seem as if they might see if they don’t feel. 
But I know a woman weighing one hundred and sev- 
enty-five pounds and fastening a twenty-four inch corset 
around her, who declares solemnly that she “has never 
laced ; ” that her form is “ perfectly natural.” And she 
even takes pride in that little waist set between her big 


% 


20 


WHAT 8 THE MATTER? 


shoulders and hips. Yerily ‘^we are all like sheep gone 
astray, and there is no health in us.” 

If ' that woman’s form is “ perfectly natural,” or, 
what she meant, just as it would have been if allowed 
to develope properly, I am thankful to say God doesn’t 
allow many such monstrosities to be born into the 
world. 

As many people neither feel nor see on this sub- 
ject, I would they might hear and know, but they seem 
as. unwilling to do these as they are unable to do the 
others. 

With what earnestness Catherine Beecher speaks oi 
the ills we suffer from this curse of improper dress • 
“ That it is that has pressed like lead upon my heart 
and burned like fire in my bones, as for more than two 
years of debility, anxiety, and infirmity, I have been 
striving to bring this subject to the attention of the 
American people. 

‘‘ There is no excitement of the imagination in what 
is here indicated.” (She had previously said that the 
tortures infiicted on their victims by the most cruel in- 
quisitors or barbarous savages were preferable to the 
slow, agonizing tortures caused by woman’s dress). ‘^If 
the facts and details could be presented they would 


WRATS THE MATTER? 


21 


send a groan of terror and horror all over the land. 
For it is not one class or one section that is endangered. 
In every part of the country the evil is progressing.” 

Dr. James 0. Jackson says, in American Woman- 
hood : ” ‘‘ In my practice I have probably had, from 
first to last, not less than five thousand women who 
have come to be examined for diseases of the lungs, of 
whom quite a proportion were in such a state as to 
render it out of the question for me to do them any 
good, they being thoroughly incurable. Yet of them 
all I believe there were not a dozen who were not 
dressed so tightly about the lungs as in course of time 
to insure pulmonary disease to any woman or man, how- 
ever healthy, had such person been subjected to the 
constant wearing of just such a dress as these poor crea- 
tures wore at the time they sought relief at my hands.” 

M. Augusta Fairchild, M.D., says in her book, 
“How to be Well:” “I have thought that His ^Satanic 
Majesty’ must find a source of great delight in the 
ruinous effect of his invention — the corset. Certainly a 
more effectual mode of destroying body and brain and 
of robbing the soul could not have been devised.” 

But I never was fond of copying. If you are in- 
terested in this matter you can get Dr. Dio Lewis’ book 


22 


WHATS THE, MATTER? 


Our Girls/’ and find out why he would rather marry 
a hunchback, a squinter, a deaf mute, or a cripple, than 
a girl with a small waist. Get Dr. Trail’s book on 
“Digestion,” and Abba Gould Woolson’s book on 
“Dress Reform;” “What to Wear,” by Elizabeth 
Stuart Phelps; “Health Dress” and “The American 
Costume,” by Dr. Harriet N. Austin. And here I am re- 
minded of something that makes me want to copy again. 
At an anniversary meeting at “ Our Home ” Hygienic 
Institute, Dr. Austin said : “ If I permit a single heart- 
heat of mine to be diminished in its force by the ill- 
adjustment of my clothing, by so much I diminish my 
capability of doing. If I reduce hy the least my 
breathing capacity, or disturb in any measure the uni- 
formity of the circulation of the blood, or interfere 
with the least important organ in its free action, I 
thereby interpose an obstacle between my soul and the 
great world of knowledge and the grand heaven of 
spirituality. Thus clothing gets in the way of work, of 
culture, and of growth. It becomes an encumberance, 
a burden, a bondage.” 

O sister women ! if we valued ourselves, our health, 
and usefulness as we ought, what a revolution we 
should make in this matter of dress! 


WHATS THE MATTER? 


23 


CHAPTER III. 

Thus far I have confined myself to corsets or tight 
dressing, and I feel foolish for having given them so 
much space; because any person has but to take a long 
unrestrained breath to appreciate the fact that there is 
no place on the body that so imperatively demands 
freedom as the very place our women and girls de- 
prive of it by their dress. But, as Dr. Austin says. 
Every woman understands that she cannot live with- 
out breathing ; but few understand that if they but 
half breathe they can but half live^ though this is 
actually the case.’^ If we must have deformity, why 
can’t we put boards on our heads like the fiat-head 
Indians, or pinch up our feet like the Chinese. They 
certainly do not show themselves as silly nor as reck- 
less of life and health as we. The simplest school text- 
books of physiology teach us the necessitj" of perfect 
respiration and digestion ; but where can we find a 
female teacher who is not so deformed as to render 
both of these impossible? With the teachers, the 


24 


WRATS THE MATTER? 


preachers’ wives, and the Christian mothers so mis- 
shapen, where shall the rising generation look for a 
model? I groan with groanings that cannot be uttered 
when I look into the future and see what must come, 
unless some merciful interposition shall stay this work 
of destruction. For at present enough corsets are manu- 
factured to take the life out of a larger and stronger 
nation than ours. 

Let us now pay our respects (?) to the shoes in which 
our enlightened and refined women hobble about. But 
what shall we sa^^ ? What can be said that the shoe 
itself doesn’t say ? Let anybody take one of them and 
regard it attentively in comparison with a foot of natural 
shape, if such can be found, and tell us what must be the 
inevitable conclusion. Just look at the beautiful foot of 
a child, and then compare it with the peaked shoe-toe 
into which your foot must go. But never mind, ladies. 
Put them on. They’re so tight and ill-shapen, they’ll 
make corns and bunions, they interfere with the blood cir- 
culation so you’ll have cold feet and headache, be nervous 
and irritable. The heels tilt you up so that your body 
as well as your feet are thrown entirely out of a natural 
position which cannot fail of inducing disease, more par- 
ticularly in the abdominal region. And such walking? 


WHAT 8 THE MATTER? 


25 


See that little barefooted child with its graceful 
springy walk, and then a woman with a fashionable 
shoe on ; such hobbling, twisting and jerking. Is that 
graceful ? 

But after all, what better can you do ? IVe tried 
for eight years to find a healthful shoe. I’ve had them 
made to order, worn them once and given them away. 
Nobody knows how to make a perfect shoe, though those 
which are manufactured by i xie store alone in New York 
come nearer perfection than any I have ever seen. Their 
shoes are perfect, with one exception — they have heels 
— though low and broad. 

A shoe made just as they make them, only with no 
heel at all, would be perfect. It is altogether probable 
that God knew what he wanted when he adjusted the 
human body to the foot standing level. When we un- 
dertake to remedy His work we generally make a botch 
of it. 

Bead this from Fashion Notes in ‘‘ The Golden Buie 
There is a strong efibrt being made by the physi- 
cians to banish the high French heels. It is claimed by 
the medical fraternity that most of the nervous diseases 
from which women sutler at the present time are caused 
or aggravated, at least, by these heels. It is true that 


26 


WHAT 8 THE MATTER? 


nervous and spinal diseases are more prevalent than they 
ever have been, and that eye troubles are so frequent 
as to take almost the form of an epidemic, and it is 
claimed that much of this is traceable directly to French 
heels. They are uncomfortable things to walk on at the 
best, and spoil the most graceful gait, turning it into an 
affected mince.” 

“ Oh, my heels are low,” Pve often heard people say. 
^‘They cairt make any diifference.” I alwaj-s reply. If 
you think they make no difference try walking with one 
shoe off and the other on, or with a slipper without a 
heel and a shoe with one, and you’ll see that even a low 
heel does make a great difference. What shall we say^ 
then, of a high one? I won’t say anything but this: 
Women don’t want such shoes as they ought to wear, 
and if they did, the shoemakers don’t know how to, or 
will not make them. 

A lady whom I know caught the heel of her shoe 
on the back-steps,, and threw her down with such vio- 
lence as to injure her for life — or at least it has been 
eight years since then, and she has suffered from the in- 
jury ever since. Another one caught the heel on a 
cellar stair and sprained her ankle, so she was laid up 
tourteen weeks. 


WHATS THE MATTER? 


27 


CHAPTER IV. 

I PROPOSE now to attack a foe who has been com- 
paratively unmolested : In other words I intend to show 
the evils of long skirts. It is perfectly useless to fight 
corsets and other follies and wickednesses, while this ene- 
my of health and freedom is allowed to go on with its 
ravages. 

I must confess, at the start, my inability to bring so 
great a cloud of witnesses as I have on hand to testify 
against the corset. What I shall say, therefore, will 
mostly be “evolved from my inner consciousness.’’ 

Certain charges are made against long skirts. Let 
us investigate them. It is alleged that they are incon- 
venient, burdensome, dangerous to life and limb, un- 
suitable for any active exercise or occupation, ridicu- 
lous, extravagant, unhealthful, degrading, and wicked. 

If in proving these allegations things sometimes seem 
a little mixed, it is the fault of the subject. For in- 
stance, I may be proving a long skirt unhealthful be- 
cause it is inconvenient and burdensome, and yet seem 


28 


WE ATS THE MATTER? 


to he proving it inconvenient because it is burdensome 
and unhealthful, either of which it is easy to do. 

In speaking of long skirts, I mean any skirt which 
comes within twelve inches of the ground. 

When I have occasion to mention the part of the 
human frame which connects the knee with the foot 
wdiat shall I call it, leg or lower limb ? Why the word 
leg,” has been tabooed and arm ” allowed to retain 
its place, I fail to comprehend. If for custom’s sake I 
write ‘Mower limbs,” for consistency’s sake I ought to 
WTite “ upper limbs ” in indicating arms. That looks 
foolish, so I shall write “legs,” and if it hurts anybody’s 
feelings, they can substitute “lower limbs,” in reading. 

To begin, then : Woman’s dress is inconvenient. Does 
that statement require any proof? Does anybody doubt 
it ? Can anybody see a woman go up-stairs, into a 
carriage, into or out of a railway car, and doubt that 
her dress is inconvenient ? Can a woman go out in 
rain or snow and not convince you that her dress is 
inconvenient ? 

I’ve seen the time when my dress made it very in- 
convenient for me to occupy a car seat which had first 
been vacated by a tobacco chewer, but in such cases I 
put the blame where it belongs, on the tobacco. At 


WHAT 8 THE MATTER? 


29 


the same time I cannot fail to see that the floor of any 
car isn’t clean enough to make it an acceptable place 
on which to lay a clean dress and petticoat, but it 
must be done — that is, if we have succeeded in keep- 
ing them clean till the station is reached, which is 
very doubtful. 

Can anybody watch a crowd going out of a car and 
not be confirmed in the conviction that woman’s dress 
is inconvenient ? How carefully we must step, how 
long we must wait while the woman ahead of us takes 
her dress out of the way and takes a lot of mud with 
it. A car which contains only men will unload in about 
one fifth of the time it takes a car load of women. 

But with all these facts staring her in the face I did 
know one woman who declared her dress was “ not in- 
convenient. She never thought of it; it wasn’t in her 
way at alip She is the only one I ever knew who 
denies the charge of inconvenience. Everybody else 
that I ever talked with admits that. I was visiting in 
her house. She lived on the second fioor, and kept her 
wood and coal in the cellar. One day I heard a great 
rattlety bang in the back hall. I opened the door, and 
the woman who never thought of her dress ” rose up 
with a very red face out of a promiscuous looking pile of 


30 


WHA rS TEE MA TTEU f 


wood. She said she stumbled and fell up-stairs; pos- 
sibly she stepped on her dress.” 

Of course I was too magnanimous to remind her 
that her dress was never in her way, but I did gently 
allude to it a few days after, when she spent an hour 
darning up a big hole in the front breadth of her best 
dress, which she stepped on and tore in trying to carry 
her Sunday bonnet up-stairs. 

By the way, ladies, wouldn’t you like to be able to 
carry up*stairs your hat, shawl, parasol, fan, travelling- 
bag, the big bundle, the little bundle, and a kerosene 
lamp all at once ? 

You can do it and not lose your temper nor put 
yourself in the shape of a kangaroo, if you’ll cut twelve 
inches off of the bottom of your dress. 

Isn’t it worth something to be so dressed that you can 
with ease carry up-stairs the baby and lamp at the same 
time? Would you not rather step easily and gracefully 
into a carriage or up steps or into a street-car, than 
to go hesitating, halting, and stumbling as you do at 
present ? 

And right here I want to bring in a physician’s tes- 
timony on the health part of the question. Charles F. 
Taylor, M.D., of New York, says: “A short succession 


WHATS THE MATTER f 


31 


of sudden trips, missteps, or blunders will speedily ex- 
haust even the strongest man. And there is no doubt 
but that the present style of long skirts for ladies’ dresses, 
requiring as it does constant, uncertain, often unsuccess- 
ful efforts to snatch the skirt away from the advancing 
feet, to keep them from tripping ; the getting into stages 
and ascending stairs in crouching unsteady attitudes, hold- 
ing up the dress meantime, require such a fearful expen- 
diture of nervous energy, that it is of itself sufficient in 
many cases to bring on a train of the most distressing 
symptoms.” 

You may say that this language does not apply to 
the style of dress now known as the walking-dress, but 
nearly all of it does. Even if it does not, of what avail 
is that? Before another six months fashion may dictate 
longer dresses, and nineteen out of twenty women will 
put them on. 

Of course a dress which leaves the feet and hands free 
on level surfaces is better than one which enslaves them 
all the time; but how much better one which leaves 
them free all the time. 

I remember asking a girl who was carrying food up- 
stairs to a sick person, “Why don’t you go faster ? ” 

“ I can’t,” she answered. “ I have to use both hands 


32 


WHATS THE MATTER? 


to carry the waiter, so I can’t step up but one stair at a 
time, and then my dress gets under my feet unless I’m 
very careful.” She never complained ; thought it was all 
just as it should be, and was horrified at the idea of a 
dress up to her knees. 

Of course you all know that woman’s dress is an in- 
convenience — all but the lady who fell up-stairs with the 
wood. The trouble lies in this ; you take it as a matter 
of course, as the natural order of things, that she be sub- 
jected to such inconvenience. It’s a mistake, ladies, a 
mistake ; and you’ll find out so one of these bright 
mornings. 

Let us consider the burdensomeness of woman’s dress. 
First, why do the female pedestrians wear dresses to their 
knees ? Is it to make an exhibition, and simply that ? 
No ; it is because long dresses would tire them out in a 
few hours. My heart gave a great throb of hope when 
they first started out. I said to myself, now, surely, the 
press will bring this fact prominently before the people 
and emphasize it. They will endeavor to make women 
understand what a burden and hinderance their clothes 
are. But instead of that, what did the newspapers do? 
They set up a howl for the women to walk. They said, 
‘‘ Women don’t walk enough.” They said, These female 


WRATS THE MATTEUf 


33 


pedestrians have demonstrated that women can walk, 
and women ought to w’-alk more.’’ But not one of them 
that I saw made any allusion to the fact that the reason 
these women could walk was because they wore broad- 
soled shoes with no heels, and were unincumbered with 
skirts. Why did they not ask the women, Don’t yon 
see what you must do, if you are to gain any benefit 
from walking?” Was ignorance or knavery at the bottom 
of this neglect of such an opportunity to help them out 
of their bondage? 

One lady with whom I talked about the walkers 
said, ‘‘Of course thev can walk easier in their short 
dresses.” 

If they can, we can, I replied. 

“ Oh, well, we don’t have to walk off fifty or sixty 
miles.” 

Perhaps not; but we do not have all the time a 

dry level track to walk on. We must go up hill and 

down, in doors and out, up and down stairs, through 

wind and rain, dust and mud. And with every step lift 
\ 

an unnecessary weight. 

Did you ever watch a woman walk with this in 
your mind ? If you never did, I wish you w^ould for a 
little while stand in front of some large dry-goods 


34 


WHATS THE MATTER? 


store and see how with every step a woman lifts a 
mess of ruffles, lace, fringe, perhaps bugle trimming. If 
it doesn’t tire you to think of it, I’m mistaken. 

I was watching a lady one day who took longer 
steps than is common for ladies. Usually they have 
accommodated their gait to their dress, and only step 
about half as far as they would if they had always 
been free. They ‘^walk mincing as they go.” As Mrs. 
Oliphant says in her book on dress, ^’a lady does not 
want to stride.” 

Well, it’s always a good thing to accommodate your 
wants to your necessities, but the lady of whom I 
speak evidently wanted to take herself over the ground 
at a pace faster than a snail’s. I asked my companion. 
How much would that lady lift in walking half a mile, 
supposing she lifts one half of a pound at every step ? 

He figured a little and said, “ Six hundred and 
fifty pounds.” Of course, half of a pound was the 
lowest estimate that could be put upon the weight of 
the clothing she lifted upon her heels and knees, but 
even at that what a silly expenditure of strength. 

I grow impatient as I proceed, to think women will 
do so, and I’ll close the “ burdensome ” part of my 
subject with a quotation from The American Costume,” 


WHAT 8 THE MATTER? 


35 


by Harriet N. Austin, M.D. “It is difficult for per- 
sons to realize how decidedly the manner of walking of 
a girl becomes changed from the time she lays aside 
her short dress and pantalets and puts on the dress 
of a woman. Up to that point she has been allowed 
her natural freedom, and her walk is as easy and grace- 
ful as that of a boy ; but the manner in which her 
long drapery is related to her lower limbs is such that 
from the moment she adopts it, grace of motion is im- 
possible and every step she takes is under restraint. 

Farther on, speaking of women whom she has seen 
in the American Costume for the first time, she says 
“ The first exclamation which one makes under such 
circumstances is, ‘ What shall I do with my legs ? I do 
not know how to walk.’ And this is exactly the state of 
the case. She does not hnow how to walk, ... It is as 
if a man who had had his hands fettered for years should 
have them loosened, and he should be required immedi- 
ately to perform with precision the gestures of an orator.” 

Does it need any argument to convince a person who 
thinks at all, that such inconvenience and constraint 
must be injurious to health ? Get the opinion of phy- 
siologists on the subject. They will tell you that to so 
change the style of walking as to force some muscles 


36 


WHAT 8 THE MATTER? 


to much more work than they were intended for, and 
leaving others almost unused, cannot fail to have a bad 
effect on the general system. 

In a tract entitled “ The Weak Backs of American 
Women,” Dr. James C. Jackson says, in speaking of 
women in long skirts, “Every time the leg is lifted and 
thrown back a little in order to get a momentum 
whereby it can put itself forward, the skirt presents 
itself in the shape of an obstacle just at the knee. The 
result is that instinctively and unconsciously to the 
wearer the body sets itself to work to escape from the 
diflBculty, and soon a habit of walking is instituted 
which transfers all the motional energies from below, to 
the point of the junction of the limbs with the trunk of 
the body. This style of walking becomes peculiar — is 
unlike the natural gait, and compels a set of muscles to 
over-action. While activity within proper limits devel- 
ops muscular tissue and strengthens it, over-action 
bilitates and iceakens it ; and here lies one of the chief 
causes of weakness and soreness of the back, of which 
our women complain.” 

But the long skirt does not stop its evil work with 
forcing an un healthful style of walking. It does one of 
two things — either of which is bad enough — it compels 


WBATS THE MATTER? 


37 


a woman to remain in-doors in bad weather and bad 
walking or else have her ankles wet. Will you under- 
take to estimate — I will not — how many women and girls 
have destroyed health and life by wearing damp skirts 
around their ankles hour after hour? Into the store, 
factory, school-room and sewing-room they go with their 
heavy clinging folds inducing discomfort, disease, and 
death. 

Besides these indirect and sometimes long-coining in- 
juries, the long skirt often directly endangers life and 
limb. Can you not call to mind some woman of your 
acquaintance who has been badly hurt in attempting to 
jump from a carriage drawn by frightened horses be- 
cause her skirts caught and held, or so entangled her 
that she could not free herself for a good jump? 

Who does not know that in accidents at sea many 
a woman is lost, and many a man in trying to save her, 
just because of that stupendous folly — skirts? Though, 
as Miss Phelps says, after enumerating a long list of 
the evils of woman’s dress, “ when I think of these 
things, I feel that I have passed from follies into the 
category of crimes.” Yea, verily ; if suicide and the 
bringing of disease and misery upon ourselves and our 
children be crimes. 


38 


WHATS THE MATTER? 


I am glad to be able to show you that Anna Dick- 
inson is not asleep on this subject, as so many people 
wide awake to the interests of humanity in other direc- 
tions seem to be. Fur this purpose I quote the follow- 
ing from her ‘‘Ragged Register.” 

“ Three of the party encased against wind and 
weather, unfashionable and picturesque; the fourth 
member of the organization arrayed in a soft felt hat, 
blue costume, consisting of loose coat, skirt to the knee, 
Turkish trousers, woollen stockings, and stout shoes. 
So armed and equipped we ^bestrode our beasts, and 
were away to the Yosemite, not, however, till we were 
joined by another party bound to the same destination, 
one of the ladies surveying our lady with disdain, and 
audibly desiring her companions to ‘look at that vul- 
gar creature.’ 

“ And the vulgar creature, from her safe and com- 
fortable and natural seat, surveyed the wretched ‘ la- 
dies’ horses,’ sore of back, lame of leg ; beheld the 
girthing and tightening and fussing over the groaning 
and miserable creatures, the lift into the saddles, the 
ungainly bags of figures composed of half long skirts and 
clumsy ‘ waterproofs,’ the twisted bodies and uncom- 
fortable attitudes, — took a mental look ahead at the 


WHAT a THE MATTER? 


39 


twelve hours’ ride over rough and dangerous roads, 
smiled to herself, and thought, ‘look at those idiots.’ 

“ Sensible and foolish, we started, and rode hour 
after hour through solemn aisles of majestic trees, till, 
toward the close of the afternoon, we reached open 
ground, where broke upon us the overture to the great 
harmony toward which we tended — a sight to take one’s 
breath, yet merely the vestibule of the King’s Temple 
beyond. 

“ ‘ Here,’ said the guide, ‘ we begin the descent to 
the valley.’ 

“ And we descended. 

“ Mesdames, the critics, indulged in a good deal of 
screaming, slipped at divers points, sometimes volun- 
tarily, sometimes involuntarily, from their horses, walked 
over the roughest places, summoned guides and mascu- 
line friends to lead their animals, to render help of 
voice and hand, embraced neck and mane of their four- 
legged servants, till the poor beasties having this misery 
added to their torturing girths must have almost smoth- 
ered, and held on to saddle and pommel till hands, 
arms, and chests were strained to numbness. 

“ And no wonder ! 

“ Said Cushing, my tall, long-limbed, bright-haired. 


40 


WRATS THE MATTER? 


wide-awake guide, who had bestrode everything from a 
circus horse to a bucking Indian pony — said Cushing, 
after jerking over and tightening down for the twen- 
tieth time, one of the one-sided leather abominations, 
‘There ainT dust enough’ {gold dust, innocent friends!) 
‘ lying round loose to hire me to ride on one of those 
things.’ 

‘ Afraid of your neck V said I. 

“ ‘ You bet,’ said he.” 

I am not able to find words to express my idea of 
the folly of riding “ side-saddle ” and in a fashionable 
riding habit, so I’ve merely italicized “bestrode” in the 
extract from Miss Dickinson. 


WHAT 8 THE MATTER? 


41 


CHAPTER Y. 

By turning to Chapter III. you will find certain 
charges preferred against long skirts. Part of these have 
been attended to, and I suppose that no one who has read 
thus far doubts that woman’s dress is inconvenient, bur- 
densome, and, for these and other causes, unhealthful. 
But the worst is yet to come. 

What ! can there be a greater objection to a style 
of dress than its unhealthfulness ? Yea, verily — woi’se 
even than the death which so often results from its un- 
healthfulness. When I say the dress is extravagant, unfit 
for any active exercise or occupation, degrading, ridicu- 
lous and wicked I have said a worse thing than to say it 
is unhealthful. It is degrading, because it is ridiculous, 
extravagant, and unfit for active exercise or occupation. 
It degrades w^omen socially, financially, physically, mor- 
ally, spiritually. It does more to keep alive — and, alas ! 
to keep true, too — the idea of woman’s inferiority than 
any other thing. 

I want to quote a little from the daily papers to show 


42 


WHAT 8 THE MATTER? 


in what estimation we are held on account of our clothes 
— even in this Christian and * enlightened nation. The 
following article appeared September, 1879. 

OPENING DA.Y.^’ 

“The world has heard something about the sorrows of 
woman and of her inability to participate in many privi- 
leges and pleasures peculiar to the ruder sex ; but it is 
the firm conviction of the being s who have to foot the hills 
that man has no delight which equals that which is every 
spring and fall provided for ladies by our thoughtful, 
chivalrous, and disinterested merchants. ‘Opening Day’ 
they call it ; but never before did poetic license stretch a 
little word to such a magnificent extent. Day ? Why 
an old-fashioned Christmas, with its twelve times twenty- 
four hours, was not so long, so prolific of surprises, so 
abounding in big bundles and — to the masculine vision — 
bigger bills. Along Broadway and other streets contain- 
ing stores that ladies most frequent, the crowd during 
the past week has been almost as dense as that at the 
walking match ; carriages have been as numerous on 
many a square as if some highly fashionable marriage or 
funeral was in progress ; cash boys have had to tramp so 
incessantly and rapidly that they are seriously wondering 


WHATS THE MATTER? 


43 


if they might not safely offer Rowell odds, and matches 
— although for rings instead of belts — have been planned 
over bewitching articles of feminine adornment with a 
degree of secrecy and skill that exceeds anything whis- 
pered about at the Madison Square Garden. Why last 
year’s robe, cloak, bonnet, or laces may not as well be 
worn again this winter as the apparel which men are 
now arousing from its summer rest is something which 
man may wonder about but never ask. He finds fre- 
quent occasion to remark that his business is not all he 
could wish it to be, and his home partner honestly says 
she is sorry ; he drops hints about interest which he has 
to pay and mortgages to take up, and his daughters 
wonder that poor dear papa doesn’t go wild over his 
engagements ; he casually mentions the aggregate amount 
of school bills, doctors’ accounts, and church dues for 
which he is called upon, and the ladies with one voice 
declare for rigid economy. Then the head of the family 
goes to his office and the gentler members stroll out, 
merely to see what is new in the stores. 

“ When the lord of that household returns in the 
afternoon to his dinner he finds stacks of packages in the 
hallway ; when he goes again to his office he finds sheaves 
of bills ; and there are questionings at home and ex- 


44 


WRATS THE MATTER? 


planations, and perhaps a tear or two; and a fortnight 
later, the old gentleman, beholding his newly arrayed 
family as they gather in the parlor before going to wed- 
ding or party, declares to himself that they have outdone 
themselves as well as their friends, and that he was an 
old hrute to murmur at the expensed 

“ Oh well,’’ yon say, no American wrote that. 
That’s the emanation from the stolid and brutal brain 
of some newly imported Turk.” 

Softly ! softly. If your statement is true, they had 
a “newly imported Turk” in the editorial department 
of the New Yorh Herald^ for that appeared in its 
editorial columns. 

But, Christian or Turk, when I read that I won- 
dered if a greater insult and humiliation could be offered 
to women. They are here represented as wholly given 
up to the pleasures of apparel. The “ruder sex,” with 
every avenue open to them through which noble work 
can be done, are said to “find no delight equal to that 
found by women in ^ opening day.’ ” 

His home partner honestly says she is sorry,” and 
he leaves us to infer one of two things : either she is 
sorry because she fears she will not have money enough 
to spend on her clothes, which shows her to be heart- 


WE AT 8 THE MATTER? 


45 


less and selfish, or she is so stupid as not to see that she 
onglit to curtail her expenses. The daughters are rep- 
resented as gentle idiots/’ to use Mark Twain’s phrase 
— and yet the ‘Hard of that household,” who knows 
that his darlings cannot be more altogether lovely,” 
than they were last year, is perfectly satisfied when he 
beholds his newly arrayed family ” and thinks, ‘‘ he 
was an old brute to murmur at the expense.” 

1 think he was an old brute anyway — murmur or 
no murmur, to confess himself satisfied if women only 
look well, even if they are destitute of hearts and brains. 

Ye gods! what a picture of American homes, Amer- 
ican womanhood, yea, and American manhood. What 
are those women but slaves ? He foots the bills.” 
Petted slaves usually, but sometimes “questioned” to 
the extent of bringing “a tear or two.” 

What is “the old gentleman” but master? — indul- 
gent usually, but sometimes, when the bills come in, 
stern. 

“Ah, it makes me to shudder and grow sick at 
heart,” to see the press, which ought to aim for the ele- 
vation and inspiration of the people, prostituted to so 
base purposes. 

Women, I appeal to you. Are yoii willing to be 


46 


WEATS THE MATTER? 


taken at the same value as any beautiful Circassian ? 
Are you ready to ignore the fact that you are capable 
of knowing, feeling, understanding, and to have your 
fathers and husbands ignore it ? Oh, come up higher ! 

Let us look further at the daily press and see what 
the New York Sun has for us. In its issue of Sep- 
tember 10, 1879, its ‘‘Ladies’ Department” contains the 
following : 

“ The only rule for color selection, with a view to 
its becomingness or unbecomingness, is to test the ques- 
tion before the looking-glass, both by daylight and gas- 
light. Take the piece of goods into the fitting-room 
of the house where you make your purchase, and try 
the effect of the color by holding up the peace of 
goods next to your face. Do the same with the felt 
hat or bonnet you propose to buy, and also with the 
trimmings of the same. The ribbons, bows, scarfs, and 
gloves to wear with your various toilets must be sub- 
mitted to the same test. It takes time and patience 
and an eye for color to do all this, but it will repay 
you in the satisfaction afforded in the final results 
For if it is 'worth while to spend the money for all 
these pretty things, it is certainly worth while to take 
the time to choose them judiciously.” 


WHAT 8 THE MATTER? 


47 


There’s work laid out for you, my pretty little slaves, 
noble work — befitting your capabilities. Your sphere is 
defined. You cannot study, for your instructor — this 
same Kew York Sun^ in a paper which came out 
within a week of this one, contained quite a lengthy 
article on ‘‘ Girls who study too hard.” It labors to 
prove that it is folly for the weaker sex ” to attempt 
intellectual competition with the stronger,” which I 
am ready at once to admit, if, in addition to the intel- 
lectual work, she must do all the work laid out for her 
in the article quoted. But I will not for one instant 
admit that if women had an equal chance for exercise 
and were required to spend no more thought, time, and 
care on their clothes than is required by male students, 
they would not fully equal them in intellectual attain- 
ments. What they have done while laboring under all 
their disadvantages is ample proof of all that I affirm — 
or rather deny. 

Who shall think of these things and not acknowl- 
edge that woman’s dress degrades her? Truly the daily 
press would make her seem to be of very little ac- 
count. 

As an illustration of how valuable her time is con- 
sidered, read this from another daily : It is a pretty 


48 


WHATS THE MATTER? 


and not uncommon sight on the Shrewsbury to see 
young city belles rigged out in dainty toilets suitable 
for a ballroom, holding scoop-nets in their delicately 
kid-gloved hands, and exclaiming with delight when 
the}" succeed in capturing a poor little crab.” 

The New York Express rates women intellectually 
as follows: ^^Mr. Garfield has subscribed for the Lit- 
erary Worldj and from tlie fuss its editors make over 
the accession to its subscription list, we would infer 
that it is chiefly taken by ‘ women, children, idiots, and 
Indians not taxed.’ ” 

How long shall we be treated in this way ? Just 
so long as women spend their time as they do now. 
A fashionable woman can do little else but dress. A 
woman who attempts to do anything else, weighted down 
and entangled with such clothes as women now wear, 
does it at such a loss of power as of necessity to ren- 
der her inferior in some respect. 

If women ever expect to compete with men in any- 
thing but self-sacrifice, a better system of handicapping 
than is at present in vogue must be adopted. 

Dr. James 0. Jackson says : The constriiers of the 
gospel, the interpreters of law, the expounders of the 
constitution, the organizers of public opinion, hitherto 


WHATS THE MATTER? 


49 


hav6 conspired to make her believe that in thus for- 
swearing her freedom, and foregoing all efforts to enjoy 
it, and in putting on and wearing everywhere, like 
an enforced convict, a dress that indicates unmistaka- 
bly her apostacy from freedom and the dignity of 
labor, she is giving the clearest evidence of her true 
appreciation of womanhood. So long as she does or 
can be made to believe this falsehood, and act under 
it, man will be her superior, and govern the world, 
though she were to vote a dozen ballots to his one.” 

True, O doctor! and its been an unceasing wonder 
to me that women will yield voluntary servitude of the 
most abject kind to fashion, and yet resist and rebel 
against political inequality. 

If women ever expect to be the acknowledged equals 
of men in any profession or occupation they must know 
as much as men — have as much power. And power 
isn’t mere muscle in these days, though that’s a good 
representation of it. 

I cannot find better words to express the financial 
condition in which women place themselves by the 
course they take in regard to dress, than I have already 
used in the following article in the Woman'^s Jour- 
nal : 


50 


WE AT 8 THE MATTER? 


UNEQUAL WAGES FOR MEN AND WOMEN WHY ? 

While deeply deploring the fact that a woman’s 
time is held at a much smaller value than a man’s, and 
keenly feeling its injustice, I cannot wonder at it as long 
as women apparel themselves in a way that logically 
advertises them as not useful even if not ornamental, 
and at the same time, as a rule, consent to spend so 
much time in ornamenting that attire. Talking on 
Women’s Rights a few days ago with a man who goes 
every day to the city in a railroad train, I made some 
remark which called from him the statement that, 
^ Everything about woman indicates that her place is at 
home — even her dress. What woman wants, to go to 
the city every day? Why, my ulster is in my way 
every time I step up into the cars.’ And he repeated 
that ^ woman’s place is at home.’ When I suggested 
that woman might adopt a style of dress tliat would 
not interfere with business calls, he quickly responded : 
^ Women were made to be ornamental.’ Well, perhaps 
that is true. Is it? If it is, perhaps the women are 
doing well — ‘ fulfilling their mission ’ — who spend one 
half their time in adorning themselves, and the other 
half in exhibiting the* result of their labors. If untrue, 


WJTATS THE MATTER? 


51 


every woman who dresses herself in clothes which in- 
terfere wdth the free use of her powers — that of loco- 
motion with the rest — is helping to sustain a delusion. 

So long as women are regarded as mere orna- 
ments (though I believe that oftener than otherwise 
that flattering (?) argument is used to blunt the point 
of some keen thrust) they will be considered usurpers 
when they take up business. 

Though we cannot if we would ignore the noble 
women who in spite of their handicapping have ^ w^on 
the race’ — we cannot help remembering how many 
have fallen by the way who might have run to victory 
had they been as lightly and conveniently attired as 
their male competitors. It cannot be denied that a 
man presents himself for a position in clothes which 
are so constructed as to be but little hinderance to him 
in any work he may undertake. This is not true of 
woman, but almost the reverse is. Of course justice 
requires that shall not affect the estimate put on a 
woman’s work if, with these odds against her, she works 
like a man; but I think no one wull consider the 
matter candidly without coming to the conclusion that 
it does. The great majority of w’omen do not equip 
themselves nor spend their time as if they ^ meant busi- 


52 


WRATS THE MATTER? 


ness;’ and until they do we cannot look for much im- 
provement in the matter under consideration. Though 
neither a prophet nor the son of a prophet I confi- 
dently predict that something much nearer equality 
than now exists in the dress of men and women will 
precede the much desired equality in wages. Either 
men must put on corsets, skirts, laces, feathers and 
flowers, or women must put them off*. Which will it 
be? or is a compromise possible? 

Dr. Richardson, of London, in his lecture on dress 
says: Of late women have raised the cry, and that too 

quite properly, that they are too much subjected to the 
will of men ; but, in fact, no subjection to which they have 
ever submitted can be greater than that to fashion in 
dress. If to-morrow women were placed in all respects 
on equality with men they would remain under subjec- 
tion to superior mental and physical forces so long as 
they cripple their constitutions by this one practice of 
cultivating, under an atrocious view of what is beautiful, 
a form of body which is destructive of development of 
body, which reduces physical power, and which thereby 
deadens mental capacity.” 

Dr. Richardson thinks the corset alone enough to 
keep women slaves, and he may be right, but how he or 


WSATS THE MATTER? 


53 


any other dress reformer can overlook tlie fact that the 
long skirt is at the bottom of all these other atrocities in 
dress is passing strange. Let a woman be as free to walk 
and go about in all weathers as a man, and you strike a 
death blow to her corsets and her slavery at the same 
time. She will hnd her feet going faster than pinched 
up lungs can supply breath for. She will find such in- 
spiration in her new-found freedom that she will strive 
for more and more. 

To put men and women into the same kind of clothes 
would do more towards equalizing them than all the 
ballots they could stufi* into a box from now till next 
year. 

Seeing is believing, and so long as w’oman looks as in- 
ferior as her dress now makes her. look she will be be- 
lieved inferior. She can’t know, nor do, nor be very much 
till she changes her clothes, for its rowing up stream to 
all the time try to excel with those about you believing 
you will fail. 

It is useless to talk that women "were made to be 
ornamental. You know and I know that the majority 
of women have to work — and I know that every woman, 
and man too, ought to work at something. 

And why will women not fit themselves for it ? Why 


54 


WRATS THE MATTER? 


will dress reformers cater to this sickly weak fancy and 
do their best to make their reformed women look like 
others ? A change in looks is what we want. Having 
once made such a declaration of independence you are 
free. So why not come out square ? You dress re- 
formers, every one of you, know that the long skirt is 
the stronghold of the enemy, and if you think you’ll 
ever succeed in taking it by manoeuvre and strategy 
you’re mistaken. You may advertise and wear reform 
underclothing for ten thousand years, and when it comes 
to getting rid of long skirts there’ll be a hard fight. 
Why not be done with all this skirmishing and have it 
now ? It’s as easily done to-day as it can ever be done ; 
and it wins the whole battle. That lays the axe at the 
root of the tree instead of chopping off‘ twigs here and 
there. Are you afraid of being called strong-minded ? 
Would you rather be ranked with ^‘idiots, paupers, and 
Indians who are not taxed,” than to be called strong- 
minded ? Ileniember there is an op'posite to every thing, 
as sour and sweet, good and bad, strong and weak. No 
one denies this fact, and yet it. is often practically ignored. 
For instance : One day a friend of mine in conversa- 
tion with a gentleman said or did something which drew 
from him, apparently before he thought, a remark some- 


WHAT 8 THE MATTER? 


65 


thing like this : I see you’re a little — well — not exactly 
strong-minded but, uh — ” 

Then he paused, and my friend exclaimed in real 
or feigned indignation, Do you mean to intimate that 
I am weak-minded ? ” 

Surprise overspread his countenance, and it seemed 
slowly to dawn on his benighted understanding that 
strong-minded has its opposite. 

Whoever sees a woman in a dress which leaves her 
free to walk as God made her to walk at once declares 
her to be a strong-minded woman. If a short dress is 
recognized as an unfallible sign of a strong-minded wo- 
man please tell me, . judging by the law of opposites, 
what a long dress is a sign of. 

No wonder we are ranked with idiots and paupers, 
etc. We ought to be if we are afraid or ashamed to be 
called strong-minded. 


66 


WEATS THE MATTER? 


CHAPTER VL 

The New York Daily Advertiser says: “It is to be 
regretted that the Princess Louise will not be at home 
on the 1st of January. We had intended paying our 
respects, and our low neck and short sleeve reception 
dress-coat is just too sweet for anything.” 

I thought right here that I .would attempt to prove 
that woman’s dress is ridiculous, but, after all, wouldn’t 
it be like making an argument to prove that the sun 
shines ? 

Watch a woman out on a grassy croquet lawn at 
“dewy morn or dewy eve,” trying to keep her dress 
from the wet grass. I don’t know of anything more 
ridiculous. Yes, I do, too. I’ll tell you. See here, Sarah 
Jane, what would you think if James Henry should work 
a week and three days on a dress and every once in a 
while hold it up admiringly and say, ‘‘ IsnH that lovely? 
but oh, how my side aches. This flounce headed with 
the passementerie and lace is just too sweet for anything, 
but my eyes and head do ache fearfully.” 


WHAT 8 THE MATTER? 


57 


Now, honestly, Sarah Jane, what would yon think if 
he should do so, and when the dress was done put it on 
and march out carrying the greater part of it on his 
arm or in his hand ? 

Well, to tell the truth, I should think he wath ath 
thoft ath thquath.” 

Eight, Sarah Jane. Now, tell me what you think 
of yourself when you do that way. 

“ Why I — I — I’m only a girl.” 

Only a girl ! but you ought to have common sense 
if you are. Maybe that's of no consequence, if you’re 
only happy ; and the Meriden Recorder says : “ ‘ How 
shall we train our girls ? ’ asked an exchange. Train 
’em with about twenty-two yards of black silk, if you 
want to please your girls. A silk velvet train would 
also make ’em happy.” 

I want to ask you one more question, though. Do 
you know of anything that is foolish for James Henry 
to do that would not be foolish for you? Wouldn’t it 
be just as foolish for you to strut down street with a 
cigar in your mouth, and spoil the air for everybody 
wdthin twenty feet of you, as it is for him? Wouldn’t, 
it be just as foolish for you to stay up half the night 
and play billiards as it is for him? Wouldn’t it be just 


58 


WRATS THE MATTER? 


as foolish for you to stand around on the street corners 
spitting tobacco juice and making remarks about the 
passers by ? 

thuppothe it would.” 

Right again, Sarah Jane, and I think you see hj 
this time that you are both human beings and what is 
foolish for one can’t be sensible for the other. 

And now, as to the extravagance of woman’s dress. 
Wait, wait; don’t stop up your ears and shut your eyes 
to a fact, even if you have ^4ieard it over and over 
again till you’re tired of it.” Read a paragraph from 
the Evening TelegramP 

“FIFTH AVENUE AND THE PARK.” 

“ A Brilliant Scene — Throngs of People Abroad on the 
First Sunday of the Indian Summer — Splendid 
Display of Dress, 

“Fifth Avenue in the afternoon of yesterday, the 
first Sunday of the Fall season, wore its old-time look of 
fashionable life and brilliancy. About one o’clock the 
numerous churches along the street emptied themselves 
of their crowded congregations, and for two hours after- 
ward the west side of the avenue was covered with a 


WHAT 8 TEE MATTER? 


59 


slowly moving mass of expensively apparelled humanity. 
The prevailing texture of dress w%s black silk, trimmed 
with velvet, and all velvet dresses in black, royal purple, 
and deep green were not infrequent. The crowds that 
sailed slowly down the avenue must have impressed a 
foreigner greatly with the degree of wealth, taste, and 
beauty in this metropolis of the New World. Not an 
ill or poorly attired person was to be met with on this 
thoroughfare of fashion, and if the foreigner was to take 
his impressions of New York alone from a stroll on the 
avenue in the afternoon of yesterday, he would conclude 
that this must be a city inhabited by nabobs.*’ 

This writer says the numerous churches along the 
street emptied themselves.” Farther on he says, ‘‘ Not 
an ill or poorly attired person was to be met with.” 
One thing is certain : The poor did not have the gospel 
preached to them in those churches that day. And I 
could not help wondering if those Christian people re- 
alize what an impassable barrier they hold up between 
themselves and poor people. Is it done intentionally i 
If not, what can they he thinhing about ? 

Is it any wonder that the poor and ignorant reason 
as follows — 


60 


WHAT 8 THE MATTER? 


Two ragged urchins stood one day 
Beside the great church door, 

And watched the folks in rich array 
From out the temple pour. 

‘ My eyes ! but ain’t they tony though I 
And don’t they sport the dress ! 

What be they, Joe ?’ ' Oh, I dunno — 

They’re Christian folks, I guess.’ 

‘ They be ! Then, if we had the cash, 

And nothing else to do. 

And washed, and dressed, and cut a dash — 

Should we be Christians, too ? ” 

— Boston Transcript, 

Think yon, if Jesus Christ had come to the poor in 
magnificent splendor, he could have so won their hearts 
as to have been their hope and consolation for eighteen 
hundred years ? Ah no. And can his followers succeed 
where he would have failed ? 

But to go back for a moment to the Sunday splen- 
dor of Fifth Avenue. Suppose “ the foreigner ” leaving 
the fashionable thoroughfare and wending his way to 
Green or Baxter streets. What would he conclude of 
the city then? O woman, in your fine clothes, did you 
think of those poor wretches? 

‘‘ Yes,” you say, and Bve given a great deal for 
charitable purposes. 


WMATS THE MATTER? 


61 


You’ll have call to give for charitable purposes, so 
long as you set the example you do now. Let me tell 
you about this ; I knew a young girl who lived away 
from the metropolis. She used to go often to the little 
country church, and she knew that the pastor was poorly 
paid, and she knew the church was in debt. Every 
Sunday a contribution was taken up and the pastor 
plead with the people to give something, if not more 
than a penny. Give what you are able to give.” And 
this young girl saw that ten prominent women in that 
church had on clothes and jewelry enough to pay the 
whole debt. What could she conclude but that clothes 
were of more account than anything else ? What did 
she do? She went away to the city and sold herself — 
body and soul. 

Then she came back to the little town in her fine 
clothes, thinking herself as good as the other ladies. 
And who dare say she was not? How did you get 
3mur money, madam ? Did you work and earn it, or 
did you marry some man your soul abhorred for the 
sake of having his money? 

It seems to me if any women ought to have good 
clothes it is that class who work just for clothes, but I 
once heard of the wife of a wealthy man in a thriv- 


62 


WHAT 8 THE MATTER? 


ing manufacturing town who said she wished the shop- 
girls were obliged to wear aprons to distinguish them 
from the ladies, 

I should think the shop-girls would want something 
to distinguish them from such ladies, shouldn’t you ? 

Do ‘^the ladies” ever think what they might do 
for the shop-girls if social distinctions were abolished ? 
Do those who have so much money that their only 
care is to buy the best they can find ever think that 
those with less money are struggling hard to dress just 
as well, and that those still poorer are straining every 
nerve to keep up a respectable appearance ? Do you, 
madam, when you try to get a seven dollar silk for 
five dollars and tell what a bargain you made — do you 
stop to think that this greed for dress is grinding the 
face of the poor? 

A merchant cannot afford to pay his clerk as well, 
the manufacturer cannot pay his workman as w^ell, as 
they could do if you were willing to put less cloth in 
a dress and pay just as much for it. Perhaps ^mu will 
reply that the merchant and manufacturer would keep 
the profits, so the clerk and workman would not be any 
better off. 

Why would the merchant and manufacturer keep the 


WHAT 8 THE MATTER? 


63 


money, instead of paying their help a fair profit ? Be- 
cause they wish their wives to follow your example, and 
wear the most expensive clothes they can get. 

And so it goes. But, “ what shall the harvest be 
What is the harvest ? we might better ask, for the 
reaping has begun. A great crop of forgers, embez- 
zlers, dishonest politicians, lying merchants, oppressive 
manufacturers, and ministers who dare not preach what 
they believe for fear they will not have sufficient sup- 
port to enable them to live in style. 

Now, is all the blame for this to be put on women ? 

No, not all. There are too many men who want 
their wives and daughters to advertise for them how 
successful they are in business, and take great pride in 
seeing them well dressed ; ” but it is true that the 
prevailing extravagance of women is very active in urg- 
ing men on in this inglorious scramble after wealth. 
Virtually they are saying, “ Get money honestly if you 
can, but get money.” Ah me ! in marrying, how many 
women ignore a lack of honesty, temperance, chastity, 
and honor ! 

This extravagance is helping to undermine the very 
foundations of honest government and good society. Our 
sons and brothers are being led to ruin by the false stand- 


64: 


WRArS THE MATTER? 


ards of womanhood placed before them in the person of 
mother or sister. 

I read, last winter, of a New York woman who ap- 
peared in Washington wearing $800,000 worth of dia- 
monds. Is that right ? I say to that woman and all like 
her, you have made the name of woman a proverb, a 
byword and a reproach, by your heartless frivolity, vanity, 
foolishness, and love of display and money ; so that even 
the women who are not as you are must labor under the 
load of shame which you bring upon them. You allow 
such an estimate to be put upon us that all women who 
have true self-respect must blush for their sex. Do, for 
God’s sake, take off your foolish clothes and ornaments 
and try to be of some use in the world. 

But this extravagant love of display is by no means 
confined to the rich. Go into our public schools and 
look at the teachers and the girls. [The boys are better 
dressed. Why, we shall inquire hereafter.] Look at 
the over-skirts, plattings, and rufilings, folds and bias 
pieces,” then tell me if the sewing-machine, which woman 
should have made an inestimable blessing, has not been 
turned to a bitter curse. Think of all the extra sewing 
on those garments. Think of the work of washing and 
ironing them. Then go to the mothers and ask them if 


WEATS THE MATTER? 


65 


they have visited the school this term ; if they have read 
this, that, or the other ; if they have answered that letter, 
or studied up that hygienic subject, and they’ll tell you, 
‘‘No; I don’t do anything. It takes all my time to keep 
the children from looking like beggars.” 

And they’ll keep on just so ; sweating and fretting 
and plodding all day till — w^hen? Till they die per- 
haps, but I hope not. There must be something in- 
nately strong and good in the human understanding if 
it can come up through childhood under all this tremen- 
dous pressure, to convince it that first, last, and in the 
middle clothes are the only really important thing, and 
yet have any conception that there are things of real 
value besides clothes and the money to buy them with. 
I doubt if it can, and I am filled with sad foreboding for 
the rising generation. 

When I was a little girl and went to school, I wore, 
in winter, a fiannel dress with a plain hem, and over that 
a long-sleeved apron, of calico, or gingham, also with a 
plain hem. I l9arned my lessons as well, was as polite 
and well-behaved as if I had been covered with trimming, 
and, I think, more so. My teachers dressed with the 
same plainness, but I thought them perfectly lovely. My 
oldest sister was married in a dress composed of eleven 


66 


WHAT 8 THE MATTER? 


yards of narrow silk. The sole trimming on it was a 
row of lace gimp ” on the sleeves. But let a woman 
marry in the same station in life now, and how many 
yards of silk must she have? 

It’s outrageous extravagance that puts twenty-five or 
thirty yards into a dress wdien twelve would answer the 
purpose far better. A fashionable woman — and who isn’t 
fashionable since sewing-machines and paper patterns 
have come?^ — piles on an immense amount of clothing, 
which answers no purpose at all but to disfigure and 
burden her. 

But shall we dwell longer on the extravagance of 
woman’s dress. It’s a dreary subject. It’s a discourag- 
ing subject. It makes a thoughtful person wonder if 
women were made simply to exhibit the products of the 
worm, the sheep, and the cotton plant. It must be very 
fiattering to the worm, the sheep, and the cotton plant 
if they could know it. 


WHATS THE MATTER? 


67 


CHAPTEK VII. 

THE DIFFERENCE. 

The words of my text may be found in the third 
column of the fourth page of the Boston Post: 

^^We learn that Marie had five car-loads of clothes 
when she was married, and we haven’t even heard of 
Alfonso’s having a new undershirt.” 

Now, Marie — or Sarah Jane, you will suit my pur- 
pose better, and you do the same way — I Want to try 
and find out what this means. Can you tell me ? 
What did you have five car-loads of clothes for, and 
Alfonso — or James Henry — not even have a new under- 
shirt? Are you bigger than he is; or what reason is 
there for such a difierence ? 

He did have a new undershirt, but it was not 
heard of,” you say. 

Why should we not hear of his clothes as well as 
yours ? There’s a question, not for you only, but for the 
whole civilized world. Can anybody see why a woman’s 


68 


WBArS THE MAT TER f 


clothes should occupy so much more room, time, and at- 
tention than a man’s ? 

In the January number of the Laws of Life^ its 
editor, Fannie B. Johnson, writes Why and Why.” 
It is an article that every person who has arrived at an 
age to understand it ought to read. I give a few ex- 
tracts : Why should a man have but five buttons on 

his vest and a woman thirteen? Why should ho- have 
room under his vest for the full play of his lungs, . . . 
and under her vest there be so little room that the ribs 
cannot part to let the lungs play, and thus, while she 
has twice or thrice as many buttons as he, she can get 
only a half or third as much vital air ? ” 

Does anyone dare reply to this that it is their own 
choice ? 

Is it possible that women do not appreciate air, but 
do appreciate buttons ? 

Again, “ Why should she drag ball and chain in the 
form of trains heavy loaded with folds, fiounces, and 
linings, and of skirt over skirt, all weighted with dry 
goods, while his limbs carry no more than is needed for 
protection and warmth? Why should his feet have ‘free 
course to run ’ — why did she not add “ and be glori- 
fied ? ’ — while hers are kept under petticoats ? ... 


WITATS THE MATTER? 


69 


Why should not the idea of protection to the eyes and 
frontal brain pertain in the making of her hat as in 
his ? In her case it may or may not be ; in his it is 
never lost sight of. . . . 

Why is conventional propriety made a strait-jacket 
for women and girls, and a loose mantle for men and 
boys ? Why, when a wife works hard as her husband, 
should he hold the purse-strings and she be made a 
beggar for his charity ? . . . Common questions, easily 
asked, but who shall truly answer them? Whoever 
would find the right answer must dig down to the 
foundations on which society rests. He will find a great 
many rotten beams, there, the stones crumbling and 
mouldy^ and withal a rank order of heathenism^ I 
have only taken a few sample sentences from the article, 
every word of which was precious, and when I read it 
I thanked God and took courage.” 

My courage was not gone when a few days after an 
old-school physician said to me, I like your dress very 
much. It would add much to the health of women if 
they would all wear it.” (I was wearing the American 
eostume.) 

I replied, they will before long, or something similar. 

“I think not,” he replied; “ women are too fond of 


70 


WHATS THE MATTER? 


show to ever give up long skirts, for by so doing the 
greatest and most available arena for display would be 
lost.” 

I answered, you talk as if women were to remain 
forever what they are now. I believe they are progress- 
ing. Do you forget the time when men wore their wigs, 
their buckram sleeves, their breeches’ legs stuffed with 
bran, their knee-buckles, shoe-buckles, lace frills, ruffled 
shirt bosoms, etc., etc. ? Do you forget the indignation of 
the Roman senators the first time tliey were addressed 
by a man in trousers? How they clung to the toga. 
But the • survival of the fittest” has kept the trousers. 

Perhaps men have gone a little to extremes in their 
pruning process, but their dress is comparatively con- 
venient. 

‘‘ Well,” said the doctor, somewhat meditatively, per- 
haps in the course of ten or twelve generations women 
will progress so far as to have some regard for health, 
and value comfort and convenience more than show — 
which they certainly have not and do not now — but not 
in my day.” 

It makes me wince, it cuts me terribly, to hear women 
so spoken of — the more so because I know that there is 
much truth in it. But I know, too, that that good old 


Wn:ATS THE MATTER? 


71 


doctor doesn’t see it all. He may have watched the ebb 
and flow of fashion’s tide, but he does not know that 
under all is a mighty current of feeling, an uneasy long- 
ing for something better, that will ere long rise and swell 
to a grand torrent, overflowing and carrying away the 
follies and vanities of woman, thus leaving her free, for 
glorious work in this world which has so much need of 
it. Oh, there is work that has waited so long! But 
woman’s robes have so entangled her that she could not 
work. 

But let us come back for a little to a consideration 
of the difference. In the beginning I asked. Why are 
women less powerful of . intellect than men ? — which they 
are if ‘‘common fame” has it right. 

I do not propose here to dispute “common fame.” 
I am obliged to confess that “ common fame ” has a 
very plausible argument so long as women manifest the 
folly and weakness at present to be seen in their dress. 
The trouble is they have devoted all their attention to 
the show of dress with no regard to the weightier mat- 
ters. And haven’t they obtained show ? I’d like to see 
a man of the strongest intellect concoct anything with 
more “ show ” to it than women at various times have 
to their clothes. It could not be done. Let women 


72 


WRATJS THE MATTER? 


once apply their powerful intellects to comfort and con- 
venience in dress, and you’ll see sometlring as much bet- 
ter than your hot woollen pants and stiff shirt collars all 
through dog-days as can be imagined. 

But while women dress as at present, I expect to 
see them ridiculed and satirized by such articles as ap- 
peared in the Washington Capitol of October 5, 1879. 

The best evidence of inferiority in the female 
mind to the male is found in the difference of dress. 
A man clothes himself with a view to comfort and con- 
venience ; a woman for show, in accordance with vitiated 
taste. His dress is not so convenient as might be, but 
he struggles manfully in that direction. She, on the 
contrary, consents to inconvenience, to torture and ill- 
health, that she may appear, not in good taste, but in 
the requirements of good society. 

^^She makes of herself a monstrosity, for if the out- 
line of her drapery is to be taken as an indication of 
the natural growth beneath, the nude woman, with her 
monstrous protuberances, would make a man howl with 
anguish. She weighs down her idiotic little skull with 
the decaying hair of dead women, and puts her heel 
under the centre of her instep. Were it not that cus- 


WRATS TEE MATTER? 


73 


tom made it law that we accept fashion with the same 
stupidity that originated it, a fashionable woman would 
be an exceedingly vulgar object to contemplate/’ 

“A woman is built by her Creator to be a mother; 
any change from the original plan is for the worse. 
To have her slender in the waist, which nature never 
intended, is to fit her for the beastly round dance, but 
it renders it impossible for her to be the healthy mother 
of healthy children.” 

No thoughtful woman can read such a criticism as 
that on her sex without asking. Why is it that men and 
women dress so differently ? As a writer before quoted 
said, we must dig down to the foundations of society 
for our answer, and we shall find a ‘‘ rank odor of 
heathenism.” 

The answer can be more easily thought out than 
put into words. When I, for the first time, heard Dr. 
James C. Jackson say “the long skirt is an emblem of 
slavery,” I thought he was talking nonsense. I had 
put it off* from considerations of health and convenience, 
with no thought that dress had moral, intellectual, social, 
and spiritual import. But that saying grew upon me, 
till to-day I recognize in it a truth of vast importance. 


74 : 


WHAT 8 THE MATTER? 


The long skirt is at once a cause and effect of woman’s 
slavery ; for the long skirt is the chief difference in the 
dress of man and woman. In other respects they may 
be dressed alike, even the law allows that, but look 
down to the feet, and at once you conclude whether 
the person under inspection is male or female. Is there 
such a difference in the feet of men and women as to 
justify this, or is the distinction an arbitrary one ? 

A great deal has been said against so much differ- 
ence in the dress of men and women as now exists. It 
has been argued, that so long as it exists men and women 
cannot meet on an equal footing in any respect. But 
let us see what arguments are offered in its favor. 

First : It is asserted that there must be a difference 
in dress to distinguish the men from the women. 

Second: It is a woman’s duty to make herself attrac- 
tive — to ‘‘ look her best ” — as some of the religious papers 
have lately put it. 

A long time ago Dr. Holland said, ‘^Ho woman should 
allow another woman to appear better dressed in her 
husband’s eyes than herself,” or words to that effect ; but 
that is a spoonful of the namby-pamby he has always 
been offering to women, and we don’t pay much atten- 
tion to it. 


WHATS THE MATTER? 


75 


I never hear assertion No. 1 made without asking my- 
self, Whose business is it, if I behave myself peaceably 
and properly, interfering with no one's rights, whether I’m 
a man or woman? 

But admitting, to save time, that there ought to be a 
difference, is it necessary to put it around tlie feet and 
legs? Compel a woman to wear a sun-bonnet or a pair 
of spectacles, to carry an ear-trumpet or wear a big hat, 
or a big bow on her head — do something that will leave 
her free to go about. 

Good people, jon who declare there must be a differ- 
ence in the dress of men and women, did you ever 
hear of the artist (?) who was exhibiting a picture of 
“Daniel in the Lion’s Den ? ” He explained thus*: “My 
friends, Daniel may be easily distinguished from the lions 
by having a blue cotton umbrella under his arm.” 

You take God for just such a dauber as that. I ask 
you if the beard on a man’s face does not sufficiently dis- 
tinguish him from a woman? Would it not be infinitely 
more just, because infinitely more in accordance with 
nature, to prohibit every man from shaving instead of 
compelling women to wear skirts? You may reply that 
all men have not a beard, but it is equally true that all 
w’omen do not wear skirts. I have read of many women 


76 


WHATS THE MATTER? 


Avlio have worn clothes that caused all who saw them 
to suppose them to be men. 

But if you still insist that skirts must be worn to 
distinguish the sexes, I insist that the men ought to wear 
them, if the claim is true that they are the stronger. 
They are too much for the women. 

Ordinarily about my work I wear nothing below the 
knee but bifurcated garments. Sometimes, however, I 
go about the house for an hour or so in such skirts as 
women ordinarily wear. Not as bad as that either, for 
all the dresses that are sold for working dresses have a 
long train, while I have skirts two or three inches from 
the floor. And how they do fret, and worry, and tire me. 
It is far within bounds to say that a woman’s work, 
dressed as she ordinarily dresses, exhausts her as much as 
twice that amount would do were she properly dressed. 
So I say again, if skirts must be worn and men are natu- 
rally stronger than women, let the men wear them ; for 
we are not able. Dr. Foot, in his ‘^Medical Common 
Sense,” says that a Belgian writer has shown from his- 
tory that women were the first to wear trousers. That 
is quite probable. So, usurper, please step out and leave 
us our rightful clothing ; then, if your wife should insist 
on having a wood-colored carpet when you want a red 


WBA TS THE MATTER? 


77 


one, you won’t have to complain of being under petti- 
coat government.” 

Dr. Jackson says, in American Womanhood:” 

‘^Put every man on earth into petticoats, and keep 
thena on him, and God’s sunshine would go back on the 
world’s dial, till the blackness of darkness would com- 
pletely cover its face.” 

We must suppose, however, that he overlooked the 
fact, that if men should put them on women would put 
them off — because ^^men and women must dress differ- 
ently, you see, else we would not know who were men 
and who were women.” 


78 


WHAT 8 THE MATTER? 


CHAPTER VIII. 

Will you now consider the second reason advanced 
for women’s dressing as they do. 

Her duty to be attractive — to look her best! 

Will you tell me why? Think it over, and over, 
and over again. What does it mean ? I could explain 
it to you if this language were addressed to the women 
in the palace of the Turkish sultan, but such things in 
papers professedly Christian are to me incomprehensible. 
We know what the Turk believes women were created 
for, and we know also that Jesus Christ put no differ- 
ence between the man and woman. He never said to 
the man this is your work, and to the woman this, an- 
other kind, is yours. Either the whole gospel, with its 
responsibilities and duties, its penalties, privileges, and 
rewards belong to woman, or she has no part nor lot 
in the matter. There is no special gospel for her. 
And my friends, fathers and mothers, who have brought 
up your daughter to be attractive and look her best, 
what shall she say when the Master says, I was an 


WMATS THE MATTER? 


79 


hungered, and ye gave me no meat; I was thirsty, and 
ye gave me no drink ; I was a stranger, and ye took 
me not in ; naked and ye clothed me not ; sick and in 
prison, and ye visited me not.” 

Shall she say, “ I thought ’twas my duty to be at- 
tractive ? ” Shall she say, ‘‘It took all my time and 
thought to keep myself and children looking as well as 
other folks?” Will she dare in that day put in that 
plea for neglecting to use her abilities for the benefit of 
humanity ? 

Ah, fathers and mothers, beware. Eemember that 
“whatsoever a man soweth that shall he also reap.” 

Where do these teachers who instruct woman that it 
is her “ duty to look her best ” get their authority, and 
what do they mean by making herself attractive? At- 
tractive to whom and for what ? I do not ignore the 
importance of looking well. It is an important consid- 
eration — a very important consideration — a consideration 
of the very highest importance to the woman whose 
business is to play on the sensual element in man's 
nature, and whose good looks are her sole stock in trade. 
Has it that importance to Christian women? Ho; I will 
believe that they go on unthinkingly following the 
fashion. But could they see what they are doing, what 


80 


WRATS THE MATTER? 


their example is doing for young girls, would they spend 
the time, strength, skill, and money that they now do 
on their clothes? 

Did you ever stop to think what it means when you 
read of a certain fashion or article of dress that it is 
“ hewitcJiingly pretty ? ’’ Has it a meaning, or is it a 
merely senseless expression ? 

I fear we read and say a great many things that 
would make us blush, if we should stop to sift out their 
real meaning. Perhaps it is well we do not. I have 
heard of a lady who declared that the heathen would 
be saved through ignorance,” and so it may be that, 
our ignorance or thoughtlessness saves us a great deal of 
one kind of perplexity. It is easier to jog along in an 
old rut, even if it have many a pitfall and many a 
stumbling-stone, than it is to strike out a new path. 

Did you ever read of the two women in the book 
of Revelations ? One is ‘‘ arrayed in purple and scarlet 
color, and decked with gold and precious stones and 
pearls.” To the other “ it was granted that she be ar- 
rayed in fine linen, clean and white.” Hot a hint of 
an ornament. If you read of the character of these two 
women you will see that their dress is very significant. 
Which is it better to copy ? 


WBATS THE MATTER? 


81 


A man who has lectured for nearly forty years, 
much of the time on the relation of dress to sickness 
and health, said to me, You might as well take six 
dogs and suspend them by their tails over the falls of 
Niagara and expect their yelping to be heard, as to try 
to talk women into wearing short dresses or loose dresses, 
unless you can get the fashion books to pronounce them 
pretty and the style.” 

Not if I can convince them that their dress is not neat, 
but is inconvenient, immodest, burdensome, dangerous to 
life and limb, inappropriate for any active exercise or 
occupation, ridiculous, extravagant, unhealthful, degrad- 
ing, and wdcked. 

He surveyed me with a look of contempt and said, 
‘‘I don’t vrant to talk any more if your knowledge of 
women is so limited as to allow you to suppose that those 
reasons would weigh aught *wdth them. Put a fashion 
plate in the scales and it would weigh them down as if 
they were feathers. If you could be Worth’s prime min- 
ister and prevail on him to pronounce in favor of a sen- 
sible dress and get all the fashion books to picture it, you 
might do something ; but that’s the only w^ay.” 

Said I, not for the w’orld would I have that come to 
pass. You entirely misunderstand my purpose. It is not 


82 


WHATS THE MATTER? 


simply the inauguration of this or that style of dress. It 
is the development of so much courage and good sense 
such love of health, freedom, and noble power as will lead 
each one to choose for herself the style of dress best 
adapted to bring her what she loves. If a sensible dress 
comes in at fashion’s call, where is its right to stay if 
fashion says go out? So I would not if I could to-day 
make a short dress fashionable. Though well aware that 
much good would come of it, I am convinced that the 
reaction would do more harm. 

He seemed surprised, and asked my plan, wdiich I 
stated simply to be the organization in every city and 
town, of a society for the discussion of the dress ques- 
tion and said I had no fears for the result if this subject 
could be allowed to occupy the attention its importance 
justifies. 

He looked a trifie — but only a trifie — less contemp- 
tuous as I bowed myself out. 

Did that man tell the truth about women? If he 
did, God have mercy on us and our children. 

If some man should tell you that all the men in this 
country are drunkards and care more to gratify their 
taste for liquor than for health, honor, and goodness, and 
you should see in nine out of ten of the men you meet 


WHATS THE MATTER? 


83 


good reason to show that he spoke the truth, how would 
it affect you ? 

Does it make any difference whether the intoxication 
is caused by rum or fashion, if the same destruction of 
moral, intellectual, and physical power goes on ? 

And our women are drunken — not with wine, but 
with fashion. I believe, with all my heart, that there is 
more moral delinquency, more intellectual inertia and 
vacuity, and far more physical disability traceable to 
dress than to rum and tobacco, beer and cigars. Yet the 
religious teachers go on telling women to “ look their 
best.” What is your idea of what women were made 
for ? Do stop and think what you are doing. Can a 
maid forget her ornaments or a bride her attire ? ” If 
not, where is the necessity for their being constantly re- 
minded of them ? Don’t you see that they can forget 
and constantly are forgetting things the forgetting of 
which jeopardizes everything of real value ? 

I would have it so that dress and fashion ‘should be 
our servants, not masters — and most tyrannical ones as 
at present. There is no slavery equal to that of fash- 
ion. I have talked with many men and women on the 
harm done by woman’s dress, and almost invariably they 
express a desire for a change. 


84 


WHAT’S THE MATTER? 


But many men say, I don’t want my wife to be a 
gazing-stock.” 

And the women say, ‘^I’d be glad to wear a short 
dress if other women would.” 

What abject servitude is acknowledged when women 
say, as so many of them do, They say hoops are com- 
ing in fashion again, but I shall never put them on till 
I’m obliged to ; ” or T wish hoops would be worn 
again, for I always liked them.” How glad I am that 
walking dresses are in fashion.” 

I suppose men are just as obedient to her mandates, 
but for some reason she sets them much easier tasks. 
Perhaps she thinks a rebellion might result from a dif- 
ferent course. 

I have in my mind just now a woman with an 
enormous trail on her dress, and the dress itself almost 
covered with bugle trimming, saying, I’m pretty well 
for me, but I always have the backache.” And that 
woman is an intelligent Christian woman. Could any- 
thing but fashion compel her to such folly ? — so blind 
her eyes ? Truly, darkness covers the earth and gross 
darkness the people.” 

I saw a woman just off a sick-bed, and I said, 
Mrs. Slowgo, you are surely not able to be out.” 


WHAT 8 THE MATTER? 


85 


“ I know it/’ she answered, but Lily was absolutely 
destitute. Nothing fit to wear. I’ve bought her this 
sash, and that will make her look respectable till I can 
fix her clothes.” 

Yes, and you see sashes and feathers and other frip- 
pery in families where the parents are mourning be- 
cause they can’t give their children the educational ad- 
vantages they desire to. Never mind! It’s the fashion. 
Other folks do that way, and who wants to look so 
odd?” 

Well, starve the brain till you haven’t any left, if 
you want to, but refiect on the consequences to pos- 
terity. If you weaken your brain by devotion to trifies, 
how shall your children inherit a powerful one? If 
you pinch up your stomach, liver, and lungs till you are 
dyspeptic, bilious, and consumptive, don’t be surprised 
when your children show symptoms of being all these. 
And here there is no difference. Here male and female 
suffer alike, so that you cannot say even in the case of 
a sick man that dress is not responsible for it. Not 
his, but his mother’s. A son may as surely inherit a 
weak brain, liver, back, and stomach as a daughter. It 
may not be as perceivable in one case as the other, be- 
cause, in the daughter, this indirect effect of dress is 


86 


WEATS THE MATTER? 


augmented by the direct effect thus making it more ap- 
parent. What shall I say more ? 

Time would fail me to enumerate all the woes and 
miseries dress brings upon us. I have not conde- 
scended to argue (though I believe it) that a woman 
would be just as ‘^attractive/’ and look far prettier in 
a suitable dress. I leave that work for those who are 
fond of “ cossetting.” 

But I have seen a woman, thirty-four years old, who 
was brought up without corsets, and has never worn 
long dresses a month in her life, and that woman’s 
cheeks and eyes and walk and laugh and spirits would 
make a limp, die-away fashionable girl “ green with 
envy.” 

Think of that, poor tired women ! 

Dr. Elizabeth Blackwell says : “We need muscles 
that are strong and prompt to do our will, that can run 
and walk in-doors and out of doors, and convey us from 
place to place, as duty or pleasure calls us, not only 
without fatigue, but with the feeling of cheerful energy; 
we need strong arms that can cradle a healthy child and 
toss it crowing in the air, and backs that will not break 
under the burden of household cares — a frame that is 
not exhausted and weakened by the round of daily 


WHAT 8 THE MATTER? 


87 


duties. We need muscles so well developed that 
shall make the human body really a divine image, a 
perfect form, rendering all dress graceful, and not re- 
quiring to be patched and filled up and weighed down 
with clumsy contrivances for hiding its deformities ; 
bodies that can move in dignity, in grace, in airy light- 
ness or conscious strength ; bodies erect and firm, ener- 
getic and active ; bodies that are truly sovereign in 
their presence, expressions of a sovereign nature. Such 
are the bodies we need; and exercise, the means by 
which the muscular system may be developed, assumes 
then its true importance.” 

Of course it is unnecessary for me to argue that as 
women dress at present they QdiXinot take proper exer- 
cise. I have alluded to that already, and if I had not, 
any average person who could be suflSciently enlight- 
ened to set him to watching a woman for that pur- 
pose would soon find it out. 

But a little more about looks. I take it that a sensi- 
ble man in building a house will not at first choose his 
style of ornamentation and then make everything about 
the house correspond to it. He will decide on the needs 
of his family (or, what is much better, have his wife) and 
construct the house with an eye to them. Health, con- 


88 


WHAT 8 THE MATTER? 


venience, and comfort will come first in the requirements, 
and then he can make it look as well as he is able to con- 
sistently with these. Isn’t that a better course to pursue 
about dress than the one at present followed ? I know 
women who declare they cannot afford a comfortable 
shoe who afford a great many other things for looks.” 
And how many times I’ve noticed that looks ” are the 
last things to suffer when a curtailment in expenses is 
decided on. Books and papers are usually the first to be 
cut off. Next the delightful, health-giving ride must be 
sacrificed. And so it goes, through mind-growth and 
health, comfort, and convenience. Appearances must be 
kept up at all hazards. 

I am like the newly-converted man who made his 
first family prayer. He prayed (in imitation of the min- 
isters of long ago) for the president, the heathen, the 
Jews, etc., etc. After he had prayed for about an hour 
and still found plenty of subjects for prayer, he turned 
around and said, AVife, if you can wind this' thing up 
and bring it to a close, I wish you would, for I’m both- 
ered if I know how.” 

That’s the kind of fix I’m in. I want to stop and 
yet I don’t v^ant to without asking some more questions. 
I want to know if it makes any difference in the result 


WHATS TEE MATTER? 


89 


whether a woman is hindered from out-door exercise and 
going about to see things in the world for herself by her 
dress as women in this country are, or by law and cus- 
tom as in some parts of the eastern continent. I con- 
fess that if I must carry my shackles with me when I go 
outside, the prison is not so great a punishment as it 
might be. 

I want to know why it is that when your daughter is 
to be married or go on a journey or a visit, or to school, 
even, the house must be turned topsy-turvy for six 
weeks, and a dress-maker and all the female members 
of the family taken up with the preparation of her 
wardrobe, while your son, going for exactly the same 
purposes, requires no such elaborate preparation. Can 
anybody tell why this is so? Is it considered the best 
method for developing a noble womanhood ? I wish 
somebody would think deeply and explain candidly, for 
it is certainly a very mysterious matter. Whatever 
explains that will also throw light on another dark 
subject. It will tell us why your daughter must be 
burdened with a trunk if she leaves home for a very 
short time, while your son can go respectably for the 
same time with only a hand-satchel. I should be most 
happy to have these matters elucidated, for at present 


90 


WHAT 8 THE MATTER f 


it does seem to me that injustice is connected with 
them. 

“ Whjj” says Smarty, I should think you could see 
that you can’t get a lot of petticoats into the same space 
required by a pair of pants. That explains your last 
perplexity, doesn’t it ? ” 

Oh yes, Smarty, I can see that ; but will you kindly 
explain the petticoats ? What are they for ? 

“ I give it up ; but here is Mr. Con. S. Ervative. I 
think he can tell you.” 

And that gentleman says, Certainly I can, certainly. 
My mother wore them, my grandmother wore them, and 
my great grandmother wore them. Women, as far back 
as I know anything about it, wore them, and it seems 
sacrilegious to me for women not to wear them. It looks 
as if they thought our mothers and grandmothers, etc., 
did not know what was best to wear. I rather think 
they did ; and it’s my opinion that women will stick to 
the good old way to the end of the chapter.” 

Thank you for your opinion, sir, but all the same 
it’s my opinion they won’t. Did you ever hear about 
the man who carried the stone to mill in one end of 
his meal-bag? He had done it for years ; but there 
came a time when he had so much corn in one end 


WHAT 8 THE MATTER? 


91 


of the bag- that he could not arrange it on his horse’s 
back. So he said, “My boy, you must get the other 
horse, and another bag and another stone, and help me 
take this grain to mill.” 

The boy asked, “ Why don’t you take that stone out 
of the bag and divide the corn ? Then you will have 
room for all of it.” 

And the man said, “ Tut, tut, boy. Do ye s’pose yo 
know mor’n yer grandfather did. He always carried a 
stone in one end of the bag, so of course that’s the 
best way.” 

He took an extra horse, boy, and meal-bag all for 
the sake of carrying that stone, but it was not so fool- 
ish an act as we women are guilty of. We have taken 
time, golden opportunities, health and power for the 
sake of carrying about sillier things than that stone and 
things more useless. 

Don’t you think we’d better throw away these hin- 
derances and burdens, and see if we cannot accomplish 
more ? I do. 


92 


WRArS TEE MATTER? 


CHAPTER IX. 

I READ over what I have written, and my words 
sound cold and dead compared to what I feel. Words 
of life and fire ought to be employed to wake you up 
to this subject. For what do I see? Look with me at 
that desolate grief-stricken home. They carried a sweet 
young girl away from there and laid her in the dark 
grave a little while ago. She w^as just entering woman- 
hood, and just at the age when she most needed every 
obstacle to a perfect development removed she was put 
into corsets and long skirts. Do you say these made no 
difference? That she would have sickened and died 
just the same if her dress had been what it should be? 
Xou talk folly. Because a building from which you 
have dug half the foundation does not immediately fall 
to the ground, but waits till a gale of wind, will you say 
the gale of wind destroyed that building? Xo! and that 
fit of sickness did not kill that girl. Her constitution 
was undermined, and the first blow from severe sickness 
finished the work her parents had wellnigh completed. 


WE AT 8 THE MATTER? 


93 


I know many and many a young girl who is dying 
of her clothes — “ Literally dressed to kill/’ as Elizabeth 
Stewart Phelps says. 

Perhaps they won’t kill themselves. The human con- 
stitution is wonderfully strong, and they may live to 
bear miserable sickly children. And when those chil- 
dren die, and the preacher talks of a mysterious dis- 
pensation of Providence,” who will dare tell the truth 
and say, an evident dispensation of ignorant wickedness? 

Can you read that more than half the children born 
die under five years old and not feel an intense burn- 
ing desire to know and help remove the cause or causes 
of this wholesale slaughter ? 

I tell you, sir, if you are capable of making money 
enough to dress yourself and wife in the latest style, you 
are capable of knowing enough to beget better specimens 
of humanity or else drop the business. 

And you, madam, if you have brains enough to pick 
up your different articles of apparel and put them on in 
the right place, you have brains enough to learn so much 
anatomy, physiology, common sense, and morality as to 
make you ashamed of this state of things. 

Do you suppose if all the time, strength, and money 
that were spent for useless dress in Memphis for the 


94 


WHAT 8 THE MATTER? 


last five years had been devoted to sanitary science she 
would have been so plague stricken? 

What idea is this that a woman should assume the 
care of a house and family when she knows nothing ot 
the conditions necessary for health ? Everj^ housekeeper 
and cook ought to be a practical chemist. Do you won- 
der that woman’s work is so poorly paid, when you see 
how little preparation she makes for it? I was talking of 
these things a few days ago, and a gentleman remarked 
that life is not long enough for women to learn every- 
thing. 

I answered that nine women out of ten spent enough 
unnecessary time on their own and children’s clothes to 
learn chemistry and sanitary laws. 

^^Oh well,” he said, suppose that’s so. I meant 
there was not time enough for all this ‘ frippery ’ and the 
other things too, and they must have the ^ frippery.’ ” 

And he told the truth ; but in such a way as to con- 
vince me that he realized its importance in only the very 
slightest degree. He sees only a glimmering' of light. 
His drowsy lids are scarcely lifted, and so it is with the 
masses. What shall rouse them from this deadly sleep 
of ignorance and indifference ? 

Did Jesus tell the truth when he said, ‘‘ The body is 


WnATS TEE MATTER? 


95 


more than raiment ? ’’ How many act, not only as if the 
raiment were more than the body but more than all. 

Alas ! alas ! what shall we do ? Give up, and let 
them sleep on ? 

Ho, with God’s help, no! The light is rising. It 
grows brighter, stronger, clearer. The eyes of the 
sleepers are opening. The light is awakening, inspir- 
ing, thrilling them. I see them rising up in their strength 
to battle the follies in dress which so hinder their free- 
dom and growth. 

Thank God ! at last woman walks forth glad and free 
to work. 


THE END. 



I 



» 


I 


A 



t 


it. 




{ 

9 

1 



4 





r A t 


i > 

‘ r\. 




•i. 


riH.,' < 






i 





* 



\ 




I 

f 


* 



t 


\ 


\ 


s 


« 


I 


I 


* 


I 


1 1 


V 






1 



• I 

I I 



*1 




CO r 

XV ^ » X, 

y -A or - y 

. (\ ' y- “V i 

0 N fi A ^ «y <t ' x . 

x® : ' 


r> ->*■ • , 

° ^ ^ 

O 

^'V O 

\/'- 
-X'^\ “ ' ' “ " o- 

c> 0^ 

^ -W^UW'XOxr^ > V^ *' > 

O y <i or r^ t' ^ <^ yx y 

O ^A- O \\^ ^ ^ » , V>^ ^0 ^* ' 

iR ^ -i. A.'^ <1- ^ 

V‘ ^ (A^$i /lo ^ ‘7^'JfKnfe <» 

r ^^4 -/■ f ^ -/ ^.y^xxxT 

" aV'^ ° -# " 

<, ^ A 'D ^ 0 >> K .(j 

c“" 




N 



•y' 

« 






o 


C,^ o 

± 

o 

& 


Z- 

^P O 





' o ^ X .0^ S 
*^> ’S O i-^ c 

^0 'ii 


^ ° 


•» - >f» ^ ^ fN^ 

' “ \’^ ■< . o » 1 ' " ■‘ ° 

\> ^ ^ ^ f ^ 

<^- * W/a"'' c,'^" " 

aV . A\M/A = “ 

2 




^■i. 


^Oo ' » 

•/' 

o (y „ r* ■> 

K '1^ V . <- ' * 0 A 





l\ • aa 

Hii^ - . , 

^ , , , % ‘'O’ >■* 

^ ■50< A ‘.■'' 

; : " 

"'* ^'' C- ^-> <■ ''"ri. * 0 

‘ ” \n\ . . 0 , % / » ' ' V . « A :%■ ^ -I 


\ '^*ii 



o»'^. •’^‘' 


0 ^ \^ 

\> ^ ^ 

r <3 5^ ' ..'^ V 

A^’ ^ .rC 


-p <i ' 


^ V#’ 

V> 

■ . V. 


















